by George Le Masurier | Nov 12, 2018
Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.
{“dynamic”:true,”content”:”post_categories”,”settings”:{“before”:””,”after”:””,”link_to_term_page”:”on”,”separator”:” | “,”category_type”:”category”}}
New Zealander answers three No ProRep arguments
A former Comox Valley resident who now lives in New Zealand, which uses the mixed-member version of proportional representation, answers three common arguments against voting in favor of electoral reform in BC
A few readers have criticized Decafnation recently because we have not examined the arguments against changing our electoral system to proportional representation, the main question in the current provincial referendum.
So, we visited the “No to ProRep” website to understand the rationale behind sticking with the current system of First Past The Post.
We discovered that the No side does not extol the virtues of the current system that gives 100 percent of the power to a single party that may only get 30 percent to 40 percent of the votes. The No side website is singularly focused on reasons why proportional representation isn’t a good choice.
We put the “No to ProRep” arguments to Katie Betanzo, a high school teacher in New Zealand who grew up in the Comox Valley and graduated from G.P. Vanier. Betanzo lived in in British Columbia under FPTP and now lives in New Zealand under the mixed-member version of proportional representation.
Decafnation: One of the No side’s arguments is that “the most populated city will decide everything for all of BC. PR will lead to a Vancouver-centric government that only cares about Vancouver issues.” In other words, the No side argues the political power base will move to the largest urban areas and smaller, rural communities will lose influence in the government. Has that been your experience in New Zealand?
Katie Betanzo: I have to say, this is not an issue I have heard much about here. I suppose it’s arguable that, under our system of MMP, most of our ‘list’ MPs come from urban centres rather than rural areas, but it’s just as likely that a rural electorate winds up with effectively two MPs working for them, for instance West Coast –Tasman, with a Labour electorate MP and a National list MP based in the area.
The thing about proportional representation, though, it’s proportional. Every few years we redraw electorate boundaries so that there are roughly the same number of people in each electorate. So, of course, rural electorates are physically very big – but they represent the same number of voters as a relatively ‘small’ urban electorate. The balance of power does come from the cities, but that’s where the bulk of people live. So it makes sense.
Our situation normal is two large parties – centre left and centre right – supported in a coalition government by at least one small ‘extreme fringe’ party and one small centrist party. It tends to balance out.
Historically, our electorates were unbalanced in favour of rural areas. Urban electorates had 28 percent larger populations than rural ones, giving rural electorates a disproportionate amount of power.
One thing to note, though, is that we have a party which was founded since the introduction of PR that has a focus on the regions (rural areas). Because of PR, that party consistently winds up in parliament and at the moment are in government – part of the coalition. So we have both a properly representative and proportionate government, and also a strong pro-rural voice in government.
We also have a certain number of seats for Māori, our indigenous people, who are more likely than the general population to live in rural areas. Māori can chose to vote in either a general or a Māori electorate, but this ensures a strong voice for indigenous issues in central government. These seats date back to 1867.
Decafnation: The No website also claims that under PR, “the rise of backroom deals and political posturing is inevitable.” Does this happen in New Zealand?
Betanzo:: I suppose this is a concern and it does get thrown around from time to time, but it’s almost never proven — certainly no more prevalent than under FPTP. If anything, having to work together with at least one other party in government tends to keep parties honest.
The closest I can think of is some past manoeuvring by a right-wing party to ensure that another, very small right-wing party won an electorate seat (the larger party did not stand a candidate in the electorate), and thus would bring two MPs into Parliament under our MMP rules. This was widely held to be a corrupt practice and created quite a scandal.
As for any type of cronyism or nepotism – it doesn’t happen – not more than under FPTP.
Decafnation:: And last, anti-Pro-Rep people say the system gives the balance of power to extreme fringe parties on the right or the left. They say PR allows “extremist parties to have a say.” Has that happened in NZ?
Betanzo: In theory, it is possible that an extreme fringe party could sway a government (the tail wagging the dog). But in theory, it is also possible that an extreme and vocal faction within a larger party could sway that party’s policies. (That happened here when a small group within a socialist party drove their neoliberal economic agenda through into law.)
I’ve done a far bit of research, and the most common mention of the “tail wagging the dog” or “unpopular legislation” is in the context of people complaining about proportional rep. It’s a myth. There are a few examples of small parties using their leverage to get bills introduced to parliament, but once the bill is before the house it has to pass the same scrutiny as any other legislation.
Our situation normal is two large parties – centre left and centre right – supported in a coalition government by at least one small ‘extreme fringe’ party and one small centrist party. It tends to balance out.
Once or twice a far left or right party has managed to tug a government a bit further to the left or right, but nothing like the myth of the country being held hostage by an extreme fringe party.
{“dynamic”:true,”content”:”post_categories”,”settings”:{“before”:”More “,”after”:””,”link_to_term_page”:”on”,”separator”:” | “,”category_type”:”category”}}
{“dynamic”:true,”content”:”post_categories”,”settings”:{“before”:”More “,”after”:””,”link_to_term_page”:”on”,”separator”:” | “,”category_type”:”category”}}
by George Le Masurier | Sep 21, 2018
Two-term Councillor Russ Arnott feels ready to step up to the mayor’s chair and hopes to continue the town’s downward trend in taxation and create more waterfront enhancements; waiting for a court decision on whether town can demolish the ‘Shakesides’ house
Russ Arnott is taking a simple approach in his campaign to become the next mayor of Comox: He likes the direction the town has been moving the last four years, and he feels that his two terms of council experience make him ready for the job.
“Things are going well and people are generally happy,” he told Decafnation. “Businesses are taking a chance with us, developers like working with the town and we’ve got a downward trend in taxation.”
Arnott says he running for mayor because “I’m afraid to lose that momentum.”
But he has also set three broad goals for his first term as mayor.
First, Arnott says keeping commercial and property taxes “fair and affordable” is one of his top priorities.
Second, he wants to “make Comox a vibrant and accessible community for all ages.”
Third, Arnott would continue to promote projects that enhance the town’s waterfront and connect it to the downtown core. For example, he’d like to see a walkway from the marina to Goose Spit.
FURTHER READING: For more interviews with candidates, go to our Elections 2018 page
He’s proud of the waterfront enhancements the town has made recently with a splash park for children and opening up Marina Park to food trucks.
Arnott acknowledges that the two sail buildings recently built at Marina Park “pose a challenge.” But he says they were approved and planned when he wasn’t on council.
“I asked questions about the project, but the grants had already been received,” he said.
Despite his promise to keep steering the town in its current direction, Arnott says he’s not just promoting the status quo.
Arnott would hopes to phase out all wood burning devices from new and existing homes over the next five to 10 years. Wood stoves negatively impact air quality.
And he’d like to help create more affordable housing, perhaps by requiring more developments with smaller houses and smaller lots, like the town has done in the Torrence and Noel neighborhood.
Comox has already implemented an easy process for homeowners to create secondary suites, he says, and provides incentives for developers to build housing, such as the Ambleside development along Comox Avenue.
During debates about how to solve the city’s traffic problems, especially congestion at the 17th Street bridge, several Courtenay candidates have suggested that Comox and even some rural areas should help pay for improvements.
Arnott says he wouldn’t saddle Comox taxpayers with that cost.
“I wouldn’t entertain that idea, not without more discussions,” he said. “Comox has amenities that people from other areas use, let’s not nick-pick back and forth.”
Arnott is “okay” with marijuana retail stores in Comox, “if they’re located in the right place.” But he’s concerned about all the unknowns that will arise, like how people will react to the unique pungent odour of cannabis.
“We already discourage people from smoking cigarettes in parks,” he said. “But we have only one person in bylaw enforcements, so it will probably be complaint driven.”
Asked why the town hasn’t updated its 2012 Official Community Plan in nearly seven years, Arnott there’s no need to do it.
“In that time we’ve only had three amendments and few complaints, so it’s working,” he said. “Why spend $250,000 to fix something that’s not broken.”
In regards to the town’s application to the BC Supreme Court to alter the terms of the Mack Laing trusts and demolish his heritage home called Shakesides — the celebrated naturalist left gifts of money and property to be used to create a museum or nature house on Comox Bay — Arnott is guarded. He has supported the town’s action in several council votes this year.
“We’re just following the (citizen advisory) committee’s recommendation,” he said. “I don’t know what went on back then (in 1982 when Laing died), there’s so many interpretations. We’ll see what the court says.”
Arnott spent 25 years in the Canadian Coast Guard, including management positions, and is currently the manager of military housing on CFB Comox. He’s a former regional vice-president of the Canadian Auto Workers union.
And he’s an avid volunteer with the Comox Valley Community Justice Centre, the Salvation Army, the Comox Business Improvement Association, YANA and Rotary.
Arnott says his volunteer activity makes him a better council member.
“By getting out into the community and having discussions with diverse groups of people, it helps educate me,” he says. “And that informs me to make decisions at the council table.”
Arnott believes no one should stay too long in municipal office, and moving up to the mayor’s chair feels right for him. He says it also makes room for other people in the community to join the Town Council.
“At the end of the day, I don’t hear a whole lot of issues in our town. People are generally happy.”
by George Le Masurier | Sep 17, 2018
Former council member Murray Presley blames the current mayor and council for overspending and wandering from its core functions into pipelines, GMOs and running daycare centres. He wants to contract out more city services and get the Stotan Falls park
Murray Presley, a retired accountant who served on Courtenay City Council for 15 years, is making a comeback in order to reduce the cost of local government.
Presley, who retired from his practice at Presley and Partners earlier this year, said he’s disturbed by what he’s seen happen at City Council the past four years.
“It’s two against five every time; Jangula and Theos get outvoted,” he said. “We need four like-minded people on council. I’m hoping two will join me (and Theos) in getting elected.”
Presley says the council has wandered off its core function into things like a nuclear-free zone, GMOs, the TransMountain pipeline debate and other irrelevant issues.
“Why is the city running a daycare and a fitness centre (at the Lewis Centre)?” he told Decafnation, though admitting his own kids went there. “We should ask what services the city should provide — water, sewer, public safety, roads — and stop doing the rest.”
FURTHER READING: For more interviews with candidates and a full list of who’s running for councils, regional district and school board, go to our Elections 2018 page
Presley, who calls himself a fiscal conservative, uses a Yellow Page phone book analogy to explain his position.
“Open up the Yellow Pages, if there’s a service listed there that the city is also doing, we should consider contracting it out,” he said.
That’s because local government’s priority is to not get sued or screw things up, he said, while a private business is driven by a desire to do things more efficiently.
“We have great employees at the city, but we don’t have good management up top, at the council,” he said. “Council makes policy, but if it’s not doing a good job and without a strong mayor, the staff will step in and set the policy.”
Presley says the cost of government is too high. The tax increases over the last five or six years have exceeded the cost of living. “It’s not sustainable,” he says.
The housing market is one area that has suffered from too much government interference, he says.
“We have to reduce the amount of red tape or make the development process faster, that will bring down housing costs.” he said. Presley also supports smaller lots and smaller houses and permitting secondary suites.
In the City of Langford, Presley says a building permit takes only three days and a development permit just two months. But in Courtenay that kind of turn-around is unheard of.
Meanwhile, the city spends time on a tree bylaw, which Murray says he agrees with in principle, but counts as an added layer of bureaucracy that just adds to the cost of housing in the city.
“I like the idea of a green canopy,” he said. “But take a drive down Ryan Road hill. What do you see? Trees all over, we’re surrounded by a green canopy.”
Earlier this year, Presley widely promoted the idea of an Agriplex for the Comox Valley Exhibition Grounds, and helped raise money for the project. But he realizes that could be a conflict of interest if he’s elected, and insists he’s pulled back from it now.
“I’m not running on this issue or to promote it,” he said. “And, in any case, it would have to eventually go to a referendum … to see if the public has the appetite to take on the debt.”
But Presley is not pulling back his support for 3L Developments 700-house subdivision along the Puntledge River near Stotan Falls.
“The park is more important than the subdivision,” he said. “If that’s what it takes (green lighting the subdivision) to get the park, I’m okay with that.”
Presley points out that under existing zoning, the developer can proceed with 10-acre lots and “then we won’t have access to the falls.”
Presley said he doesn’t plan to knock on doors or campaign aggressively before Oct. 20, because he doesn’t care if he gets elected or not. But he does want to raise awareness that Courtenay’s spending needs to be controlled.
And one way to make all Comox Valley governments more efficient is through amalgamation, he says.
“We’d be better governed as a district municipality, or at least Courtenay, Comox and maybe Area B,” he said. “Why do we need three public works yards, three city halls?”
Presley was born in Scarborough, England. His father was in the Canadian Air Force and his mother was in the British Air Force. They met and married, and were stationed to Sea Island in 1954 (the site of the Vancouver airport).
The family moved to the Comox Valley in 1961, and Presley graduated from Courtenay High School in 1964.
Presley says that he also running to help create more jobs by adding more industrial land and encouraging clean industries. That, he says, would help young people stay in our community.
by George Le Masurier | Apr 13, 2016
By George Le Masurier —
During the years following WWII, the logging industry boomed on the B.C. coast. Tug boats pulled massive log booms down the Strait of Georgia every day, hauling millions of board feet of prime timber from northern Vancouver Island to lumber mills up the Fraser River..
Because of rapidly changing weather and stormy seas, it was a common occurrence for logs to bust loose from their booms and wash up on the shoreline. Those tangled logs, piled on top of each other, some with their root balls intact, have given a unique beauty to our beaches.
But it’s a fragile beauty. Today, tugboats rarely pull log booms down the coast, so there’s a small supply of new wayward logs. Beachcombers and private citizens have already stripped some beaches of the most spectacular driftwood.
Fortunately, it’s illegal to remove driftwood from Crown foreshore land within or adjacent to ecological reserves or federal, provincial, regional or municipal parks. It’s also illegal to take driftwood from private land or First Nations reserves. This law preserves a piece of B.C. coast history, and creates a natural museum of the important role that coastal waters played during the heyday of raincoast logging.
While on a walk through Goose Spit Park on B.C. Family Day, I was shocked to see some local residents stealing driftwood from this protected area. In the middle of the day, they brazenly loaded — and had perhaps cut — large pieces of driftwood with the dramatic pedestal of roots intact into their trucks parked near the public restrooms. One of them was a well-known local person.
At every access point to the beach from Goose Spit road, there’s a prominent signage pole that states, among other things, not to burn, cut or remove driftwood.
I reported these people to the Comox Valley Regional District’s community services branch, and shared photographs that identified them. The CVRD’s bylaw department sent each individual a warning letter. I would have preferred some harsher disciplinary action.
It’s disheartening that among all the people enjoying Goose Spit Park that day, I was the only person to report this crime. Many people may not know that it’s illegal to take driftwood. But, for kids and adults alike, It’s partly the large accumulation of driftwood that makes a visit to Goose Spit Park so much fun and attractive.
If we allow people to steal the remaining driftwood from one of the last protected areas, this little piece of B.C. coast lore and beauty will disappear forever.
Please don’t allow this to happen. Politely remind people attempting to take driftwood that it’s illegal to do so. Point to the sign posts. Take photographs of those that steal it anyway and report them to the regional district.
