Five of six Vancouver-Point Grey candidates answer questionnaire

UPDATE: Vancouver-Point Grey NDP candidate answers questionnaire

(Victoria, BC, Friday May 6th 2011) – IntegrityBC has now posted to its website (www.integritybc.ca) the answers that the non-partisan organization received from NDP candidate David Eby to its questionnaire in advance of the May 11 Vancouver-Point Grey byelection.

Eby did email his responses prior to the May 5 deadline, but they were not received by the organization.

Premier Christy Clark has still not responded. Efforts to secure a response from Premier Clark have included sending three emails and following up with two phone calls to her campaign office prior to the deadline and an additional phone call today.

IntegrityBC will immediately post Clark’s answers if it receives them prior to the close of polls on May 11.

Visit www.integritybc.ca daily to check whether the the Premier has responded.

MEDIA ADVISORY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Victoria, BC, Friday May 6th 2011) – IntegrityBC has posted to its website (www.integritybc.ca) the answers that the non-partisan organization received to its questionnaire from candidates running in the May 11 Vancouver-Point Grey by-election.

The Liberals, NDP and Green party candidates received the questions on Monday April 25. The questionnaire was subsequently sent to the BC First candidate and the two independents running in the by-election.

Neither Premier Christy Clark nor NDP candidate David Eby responded before the Thursday, May 5 deadline.

Efforts to secure a response from both Premier Clark and Eby included sending three emails and following up with two phone calls to their campaign offices.

IntegrityBC will immediately post any answers that it receives to the questionnaire prior to the close of polls on May 11. Visit www.integritybc.ca daily to check whether the two candidates have responded.

To learn more about candidates running in the Vancouver-Point Grey election their information is below:

Christy Clark (BC Liberals)
www.christyclark.ca

604- 736-7536

David Eby (BC NDP)

davideby.bcndp.ca

604-568-0062

Françoise Raunet (BC Green Party)

www.greenparty.bc.ca

778-316-2801

Danielle Alie (BC First Party)

www.bcfirst.ca

604-815-3435

Eddie Petrossian (Independent)

www.vote4eddie.com

604-618-4100

William Gibbens (Independent)

www.necessaryvoices.org

604-222-8707

 

Questionnaire

In the last two months, British Columbians have seen a change in leadership of both the BC Liberal and NDP parties. Both races contributed to a heightened political debate over the future of BC.

In order that voters have a better sense of where Vancouver Point-Grey candidates stand on issues of ethics and accountability, IntegrityBC is posing the following questions to you in advance of the May 11th byelection. We will post your responses to our website.

As you know, British Columbians are increasingly cynical about politics and civic processes. After the record low turnout in the 2009 provincial election, Elections BC undertook research on possible reasons behind voter apathy. Its report found that forty per cent of non-voters tended to say that they were not informed enough or were not engaged in politics or political issues; 53 per cent expressed disinterest in or dislike of politics and skepticism about government and politicians; and 37 per cent didn’t like the candidates, the parties or the platforms presented.

One way to re-engage voters, according to University of Victoria political scientist Dennis Pilon, “is to increase personal contact between representatives of the political system and the public.”

If elected how would you conduct yourself differently from Vancouver-Point Grey’s former MLA as a way to address public cynicism towards politicians and how would local constituents see this differing approach take shape?

Do you believe that a broader range of political voices should be heard in the legislature and, if so, what proposals would you put forward to reform BC’s democratic institutions and/or processes?

While the Legislative Assembly has a number of standing committees in place that can (and do) hear from stakeholders and members of the public, what enhanced role, if any, would you propose to increase and/or broaden the role of the public in the drafting of legislation before the Assembly?

An Italian proverb states, “When gold speaks every tongue is silent.” In 2009, the BC Liberal party received $13.6 million in donations from corporations and $4.5 million from individuals; the NDP received $4.2 million from unions and $7.1 million from individuals (Elections BC). Neither corporations nor trade unions are eligible to vote in BC.

If elected, will you support legislative amendments to prohibit corporate and union funding of BC political parties?

Would you support capping individual contributions and, if so, what do you propose the individual limit should be?

Many people believe democracy is best served by an active legislature holding the government to account, to debate and to raise issues on a regular basis that are important to citizens. Since May 31, 2010, the Legislative Assembly has met for a total of 3 full days. On June 1st and June 3rd, it sat for both morning and afternoon sessions, on June 2nd it sat in the afternoon and on February 14th, 2011, it sat in the morning ending with the Lieutenant-Governor proroguing the legislature.

Do you believe the length of sittings in the past year has been sufficient and, if not, how many days each year do you believe that the Legislature should sit?

Democracy is best served through an informed electorate. On May 15th, 2007, NDP MLA Leonard Krog tabled 70 questions concerning the BC Rail scandal followed by tabling 100 questions – the original 70 plus 30 – on February 14th. The government has not answered Mr. Krog’s questions.

Do you believe that Mr. Krog (and by extension British Columbians) deserves an answer to each question and, in the individual case of Ms. Clark, will you commit to ensuring that answers are provided prior to the next provincial election or within 90 days, which ever comes first?

Will you support a public inquiry into the sale of BC Rail?

While the BC legislature has a standing committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills, should BC also have an independent Ethics Commissioner?

What changes do you propose to improve public access to and reporting under BC’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?

With an increase in mining, gas and oil exploration and drilling, and forest land acquisitions, there is a growing fear that some environmental laws may be subverted and that parts of agreements with the First Nations may be abrogated in the rush to see these projects advance.

How will you ensure that all affected parties are heard before signing land transfers to industries dealing with resource extraction and that all associated environmental issues are addressed transparently?

IntegrityBC looks forward to receiving and posting your responses to these questions before May 4th. We will also post your campaign’s website address.

 

 


 

BC Liberals candidate Premier Christy Clark’s responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

By press time we did not receive a response from Premier Clark. Our efforts to secure a response included sending 2 emails and following up with 2 phone calls to her campaign office.

If we receive answers to our questionnaire from Premier Clark prior to the close of polls on May 11th, we will immediately post the responses.

Please visit daily to check whether Premier Clark has responded.

And please consider that the failure of a candidate to answer these questions, to appear at all-candidate meetings or to respond to individual voter queries is one factor that voters should consider before casting their ballot.

The website for the Clark campaign is: http://www.christyclark.ca/premierchristyclark/

 


 

BC NDP candidate David Eby’s responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

1. If elected how would you conduct yourself differently from Vancouver-Point Grey’s former MLA as a way to address public cynicism towards politicians and how would local constituents see this differing approach take shape?

It’s time Vancouver-Point Grey had a full-time representative who will put our community first. I will be that kind of MLA. I am running because I want to provide a strong voice in Victoria on issues that matter to the residents of Point Grey – the Broadway transit corridor, quality public education and school seismic upgrading, healthcare, social justice, climate change and a healthy environment. I have been out in the community, knocking on doors, listening to people, and attending all-candidates meetings (COULD ADD UNLIKE PREMIER CLARK). I will continue be active and present in the constituency after I am elected. Getting elected and going to Victoria is not my end goal, but the means to being a strong and responsive representative of the residents of Point Grey.

2. Do you believe that a broader range of political voices should be heard in the legislature and, if so, what proposals would you put forward to reform BC’s democratic institutions and/or processes?

I absolutely agree that a broader range of voices should be heard in the legislature. New Democrats are committed to increasing the diversity of our elected representatives and has proactively worked to increase the number of women and people from other under-represented groups to run for office.

3. While the Legislative Assembly has a number of standing committees in place that can (and do) hear from stakeholders and members of the public, what enhanced role, if any, would you propose to increase and/or broaden the role of the public in the drafting of legislation before the Assembly?

Aside from the Finance and Public Accounts Committees, over the last decade Standing Committees of the Legislature have rarely, if ever, meet. This is a huge lost opportunity. Everyone who is elected has something to offer and all legislators should have greater opportunities to scrutinize government policies. New Democrats have called for Legislative Committees to be utilized more fully as an active component of consultation on legislation and other initiatives, and for the Committees to report to legislature for increased transparency.

4. If elected, will you support legislative amendments to prohibit corporate and union funding of BC political parties?

Campaign finance reform is fundamental to restoring public confidence in our democratic institutions. New Democrats have been clear about their commitment to ending corporate and union donations to political parties and I support this position.

5. Would you support capping individual contributions and, if so, what do you propose the individual limit should be?

In other jurisdictions like Manitoba, and at the federal level, limits to individual contributions have been part of electoral finance reform. During the recent New Democrat leadership campaign, limits were placed by the Party on individual donations. I would support putting the issue of individual limits on the table for review as part of an overall campaign finance reform package.

Many people believe democracy is best served by an active legislature holding the government to account, to debate and to raise issues on a regular basis that are important to citizens. Since May 31, 2010, the Legislative Assembly has met for a total of 3 full days. On June 1st and June 3rd, it sat for both morning and afternoon sessions, on June 2nd it sat in the afternoon and on February 14th, 2011, it sat in the morning ending with the Lieutenant-Governor proroguing the legislature.

6. Do you believe the length of sittings in the past year has been sufficient and, if not, how many days each year do you believe that the Legislature should sit?

When the current government was first elected they introduced fixed sittings – approximately 15 weeks in the spring when the Throne Speech and Budget are introduced and debated and another 8 weeks in the fall. This spring, the Legislature will sit for about 17 days if the schedule put forward by the government holds. This provides just over 2 weeks for debates on issues that matter to British Columbians, for the passage of legislation and for the Opposition to ask questions and make statements on issues of concern to their constituents. It also includes the approval of a $42 billion budget, which with the current allotment of time, means the Opposition will be scrutinizing $42 billion worth of spending at an average of $470 million per hour. The Legislature is the people’s house. It should sit for the days agreed to when the fixed sitting schedule was enacted so that full debate and public scrutiny can take place.

7. Do you believe that Mr. Krog (and by extension British Columbians) deserves an answer to each question and, in the individual case of Ms. Clark, will you commit to ensuring that answers are provided prior to the next provincial election or within 90 days, which ever comes first?

The people of BC deserve answers to the outstanding questions around BC Rail. New Democrats have been asking these questions for years, and if elected, I will work with my New Democrat colleagues to continue to press the government to provide answers to all of these questions.

8. Will you support a public inquiry into the sale of BC Rail?

Yes. New Democrats have been calling for a full public inquiry into the sale of BC Rail and will continue to do so, especially in light government’s decision to pay the $6 million dollar legal bill of former BC Liberal political aides.

9. While the BC legislature has a standing committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills, should BC also have an independent Ethics Commissioner?

British Columbia currently has an independent Conflict of Interest Commissioner who can investigate or inquire about alleged contraventions of the Members’ Conflict of Interest Act and who provides Members with advice on how to avoid these situations. I would be open to further discussion of the role of an Ethics Commissioner and would need to learn more from you about what you envision their role being.

10. What changes do you propose to improve public access to and reporting under BC’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act was introduced by a New Democrat government and has been an important tool in increasing the transparency and accountability of government. New Democrats are committed to restoring a high standard for making information more readily available to the public by requiring faster turn-around on Freedom-of-Information requests and addressing the excessive fees that have been levied by the current government. New Democrats also support expanding the scope of the Act to include information from quasipublic bodies such as Translink.

With an increase in mining, gas and oil exploration and drilling, and forest land acquisitions, there is a growing fear that some environmental laws may be subverted and that parts of agreements with the First Nations may be abrogated in the rush to see these projects advance.

11. How will you ensure that all affected parties are heard before signing land transfers to industries dealing with resource extraction and that all associated environmental issues are addressed transparently?

Economic development cannot be built on a foundation of conflict and division. It creates uncertainty for investors, industry, people and communities, and undermines the possibility for long-term economic planning and job growth. Sound economic decision making must be done in an environmentally balanced way and involve real dialogue with local First Nations.
New Democrats will develop new, improved Environmental Assessment legislation that provides scientific analysis, genuine public participation and full consultation with First Nations.


 

BC First Part candidate Danielle Alie’s responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

To view Ms. Alie’s response please see the link below.

 

Danielle Alie’s response 

 


 

 

 

Green Party MLA candidate Françoise Raunet’s responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

1. If elected how would you conduct yourself differently from Vancouver-Point Grey’s former MLA as a way to address public cynicism towards politicians and how would local constituents see this differing approach take shape?

Like many British Columbians, I was very disappointed when our previous MLA for Vancouver-Point Grey, Premier Gordon Campbell, chose to cancel the fall legislature sitting in 2008. At the time, he claimed that there wasn’t enough that needed to be done in order to justify calling MLAs back to Victoria. I find this reasoning frankly ludicrous, as the day-to-day functioning of any business I have ever worked for requires decisions to be made daily. How on earth can running an entire province demand so much less? If politicians can’t even see fit to meet and openly discuss issues of public concern, then they are not doing the job that we as voters hired them to do when we cast our ballots.

As MLA, I would communicate with the voters of Point Grey on a regular basis via YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and other social media to keep them informed about how the business of running BC is being played out in Victoria. As the only Green Party representative in the Legislature, I will speak loudly and forcefully on issues that matter to a significant number of Point Grey voters and which have not been adequately addressed by the other two parties over the last 20 years: environmental degradation, erosion of community, growing social inequality, rising militarism, and short-sighted management of natural resources.

2. Do you believe that a broader range of political voices should be heard in the legislature and, if so, what proposals would you put forward to reform BC’s democratic institutions and/or processes?

As a supporter of the Green Party since I first started voting, I have long been concerned about the fact that Green voices are never represented in the BC legislature. I firmly believe that we need to introduce some kind of proportional representation to our electoral system in order to ensure a better representation of the breadth of public views. I was a strong supporter of the BC-STV system, and I was bitterly disappointed when voters rejected it. I think one of the problems may have been that the system appeared, on the surface, to be too complex. Perhaps a preferential voting system, such as those used by both the BC Liberals and NDP to elect their leaders, would be more amenable to BC voters, as it wouldn’t change the fact that there is only one MLA per electoral district. Another thing we could do to reform BC’s democratic institutions and processes is to allow free votes in the legislature, so that MLAs would be more accountable to the voters who elected them and not be forced to conform to the views of their party leaders. Also, we could require legislative committees to engage in more public consultation prior to drafting or revising legislation. Perhaps we could establish citizens advisory committees to consult with, similar to those used in the participatory budgeting process in the city of Porto Alegre, Brazil.

3. While the Legislative Assembly has a number of standing committees in place that can (and do) hear from stakeholders and members of the public, what enhanced role, if any, would you propose to increase and/or broaden the role of the public in the drafting of legislation before the Assembly?

As I mentioned briefly at the end of the above response, I would be in favor of creating more avenues for direct citizen participation in our democratic processes along the lines of the neighbourhood committees that are responsible for deciding on budgetary spending priorities in many parts of the world. Also, the Green Party believes strongly in the need to decentralize government decision-making. If we give more power and authority to local and regional governments, especially in the areas of energy development, social services, transportation, regional growth plans, and the use & protection of land & resources, than it would be easier for citizens to participate directly in the decisions that affect them most.

4. If elected, will you support legislative amendments to prohibit corporate and union funding of BC political parties?

Yes, definitely. Politics have been dominated for too long by the needs of interest groups that contribute to candidates’ campaigns. The Green Party of BC is committed to implementing campaign finance reform that would eliminate corporate and union donations, as well as capping the amount of individual donations and restricting donations to residents of BC. I was shocked when, as a new candidate, I recently went over the BC Election Act and couldn’t find any limits on campaign contributions from individuals. I thought I must have been reading it wrong, but there really are very few rules in place.

5. Would you support capping individual contributions and, if so, what do you propose the individual limit should be?

I definitely support capping individual contributions to prevent certain wealthy and well-connected individuals from wielding a disproportionate amount of influence over government decision-making. I think that individual limits at the federal level are capped at around $1,100. This seems like a reasonable amount to me.

6. Do you believe the length of sittings in the past year has been sufficient and, if not, how many days each year do you believe that the Legislature should sit?

I definitely do not believe that the length of sittings in the past year was sufficient. With an MLA base pay that is (I believe) somewhere in the region of $75,000 to $100,000 per year, these folks are clearly getting paid to do a full-time job. It is highly unlikely that the 3 days they spent sitting in the legislature in 2010 were so complex that they required the rest of the year to be spent preparing for them. I think that MLAs should be dividing their time equally between 1) their electoral districts, where they need to make themselves regularly available to meet the needs of their constituents; 2) the Legislative Assembly in Victoria, where they should be working side-by-side with MLAs from around the province to govern effectively; and 3) their committee work, should they be members of any such committees. It makes sense that this time should be divided into thirds. This would mean that the Legislature should sit for at least 4 months of the year.

7. Do you believe that Mr. Krog (and by extension British Columbians) deserves an answer to each question in the individual case of Ms. Clark, will you commit to ensuring that answers are provided prior to the provincial election or within 90 days, which ever comes first?

Yes. Given that the taxpayers of BC paid the bill for both the prosecution and the defense in the BC Rail case, I think it is very important that all questions are answered completely, openly, and truthfully.

8. Will you support a public inquiry into the sale of BC Rail?

Yes, I would support such an inquiry, because I worry that some of the allegations floating around cut to the very core of our democratic processes. However, I would also hope that such an inquiry could be conducted with the utmost concern for taxpayer expense and with complete independence and transparency.

9. While the BC legislature has a standing committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills, should BC also have an independent Ethics Commissioner?

Yes.

10. What changes do you propose to improve public access to and reporting under BC’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?

Given that cabinet-level information was clearly circulating outside of cabinet in the BC Rail case, including into the hands of David Basi, Bob Virk, and Bruce Clark (the current Premier’s brother), it seems rather strange that the heads of public bodies in BC are allowed to withhold requested information that is considered advice to cabinet. This seems to be overly vague. What exactly is considered “advice to cabinet”? And why shouldn’t the public have access to it as well? We do, after all, elect the MLAs to whom cabinet is accountable.

I’m not a lawyer, and I’m sure that there are many legal arguments to be made over the exact clauses of the Act and how they are or aren’t serving the public interest (I’m sure David Eby will have some illuminating things to say on this topic). What I do know, however, strikes me as unfairly stacked in favor of government insiders and lobbyists and against the public’s best interest.

11. How will you ensure that all affected parties are heard before signing land transfers to industries dealing with resource extraction and that all associated environmental issues are addressed transparently?

We are incredibly fortunate in BC to have a variety of natural resources that is the envy of other places on earth. Responsible use of these resources is imperative if we are to ensure healthy communities and a strong economy well into the next century and beyond. The Green Party of BC’s plan for the environment focuses on conservation of resources through improved efficiencies, reduction of toxic pollutants, and the protection of wilderness. We are committed to restoring and enhancing public and local government control over resource use, development, and the protection of ecosystems. We feel that the best route to ensure greater transparency over environmental issues and greater inclusion of all affected parties in decision making is to establish elected Regional Resource Management Boards responsible for reviewing all development proposals. We would also strengthen Environmental Assessments and Standards. When it comes to control over BC’s fishing resources, we will negotiate with the federal government to shift control of fisheries back into the hands of coastal communities and small fishers. We will also reform the licensing of fishers in order to break up the corporate concentration in big seiner licenses and to reallocate licenses back to small-scale fishers. Additionally, the Green Party of BC supports re-evaluating all run-of-river projects, pending strengthened environmental assessments.

The BC Green Party would combine the current Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Energy, and the Climate Change Secretariat into a new Ministry of Environment, Energy, and Climate Change. This ministry would oversee a newly created BC Energy Authority (BCEA), which would be responsible for energy regulation and planning across the province. BC Hydro and any new power producers would report to the BCEA, as would the Regional Resource Management Boards. The BCEA would be required to favour cooperative and public ownership, as well as Small Power Producers; to favour local generation projects; and to promote renewable sources of power, such as solar, ocean, and wind power. Also, in order to prevent the sale of BC’s energy resources to foreign entities, the Green Party would require that all of our own province’s short and long-term energy needs are fully met before any foreign energy sales take place. We would work towards gradually phasing out power imports from fossil fuels and other greenhouse gas emitting sources.

In terms of BC’s mining industry, which is a significant source of investment, jobs, and revenue in BC, the Green Party believes that we need to make changes to our current practices if we want to continue to profit from these resources. With a responsible government providing oversight of the industry, mining doesn’t have to carry the environmental and social costs that it has in the past. Mining companies are generally highly profitable. The first thing to do is to eliminate all subsidies for mining and mineral developments and to establish a tax on mining profits that will give British Columbians—who are the true owners of the resource—a fair return on their investment. We would require all mining proposals to incorporate triple-bottom-line accounting, which considers the social and environmental costs as well as the economic ones. Before active mining is allowed to begin, all proposals must have clear and comprehensive reclamation plans, including plans to deal with acid mine draining. Additionally, any third party applying for an exploration or development permit within a designated exploration area would be required to submit a consent document issued by the affected First Nations.

When it comes to forestry, BC has unfortunately lost a lot of forest industry capital to the USA and other areas. It makes no sense that we are shipping raw logs to China, where they are turned into manufactured goods that we then buy back. The Green Party of BC is committed to managing our forests responsibly for present and future generations by protecting ecological integrity and producing sustainable, high quality, profitable forest products. Through tax shifting, we will encourage the development of more value-added, second growth processing facilities right here in BC. We would provide low-interest start-up loans to encourage small, labour-intensive eco-forestry logging companies and value-added forest product firms. We would develop regional log markets, to ensure that small and value-added BC-based forest businesses have access to a reliable wood supply. We would develop a licensing system and enforceable rules for sustainable harvest of non-timber forest products by local people. In order to help build a market for high-quality, sustain ably harvested local wood products, we would support companies that want Forest Stewardship Council eco-certification for the wood products to help market eco-certified wood products internationally.

The creation of Regional Resource Management Boards will put control and oversight of BC’s greatest asset back into the hands of the locals who have a strong interest in protecting them for future generations. By building strong regional economies that are based on sustainable use of local resources and value-added manufacturing processes, we can ensure greater transparency over environmental issues and greater inclusion of all concerned parties in the resource extraction process.

 

 


 

 

Independent MLA candidate Eddie Petrossian’s responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

1. If elected how would you conduct yourself differently from Vancouver-Point Grey’s former MLA as a way to address public cynicism towards politicians and how would local constituents see this differing approach take shape?

I believe the next MLA should be a non-Premier, so they can have full time attention to conducting the business of the riding. Premier Campbell’s legacy was poor for the average resident, and the HST has hurt almost every small business in the riding. MLA’s need to engage the public, thus they must listen,and learn from the facts available, and review the overall situation on the ground, attempt to fulfill the requirements according the a long term plan of action for the neighbourhood. I will be proactive rather then reactive; i will hold town hall meetings to hear the publics views on issues.

2. Do you believe that a broader range of political voices should be heard in the legislature and, if so, what proposals would you put forward to reform BC’s democratic institutions and/or processes?

Firstly, we need to move past the current electoral system and approve a hybrid of the STV, which failed last round, restoring the integrity of our representative system. I would fast track the Freedom of Information request channels, speeding up the process for open and honest government. I would introduce legislation stipulating MLA’s responsibilities as well as sitting and business conducting guidelines.

3. While the Legislative Assembly has a number of standing committees in place that can (and do) hear from stakeholders and members of the public, what enhanced role, if any, would you propose to increase and/or broaden the role of the public in the drafting of legislation before the Assembly?

Standing Committees hardly sit, unless there is a public outcry, as we witnessed during the Inititaive and Recall Process. In fact, many MLA’s are paid extra stipends for being named on a committee, which never gets together to deliberate. When the public trusts their MLA, they will work hand in hand to produce the details of a legislation.

4. If elected, will you support legislative amendments to prohibit corporate and union funding of BC political parties?

Yes

5. Would you support capping individual contributions and, if so, what do you propose the individual limit should be?

Yes, $500 for Corporations/annually; and $250 for each individual/annually. This amount best bbe discussed in the open and to review the current Elections guidelines on donations.

6. Do you believe the length of sittings in the past year has been sufficient and, if not, how many days each year do you believe that the Legislature should sit?

No, it has not been enough given the nature of work to be conducted on behalf of the people. As i indicated before, I would support legislating sitting and or serving periods to ensure. I would also propose legislation for MLA’s to list all expenses associated with their public service, so the public can judge performance. Furthermore, I would be supportive of amending the Recall & Inititaive Act so that at any time the people in a riding can Recall their MLA for lack of performance.

7. Do you believe that Mr. Krog (and by extension British Columbians) deserves an answer to each question and, in the individual case of Ms. Clark, will you commit to ensuring that answers are provided prior to the next provincial election or within 90 days, which ever comes first?

Yes, Mr. Krog deserves respect and answers. Unfortunately, in the last decade, the government has been reactive and disrespectfull to not only individual British Columbian’s, but to organization’s such as the BCTF. I will committ and support any inquiry that will shed more light on the sale of public assett’s, without due process.

8. Will you support a public inquiry into the sale of BC Rail?

Yes.

9. While the BC legislature has a standing committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills, should BC also have an independent Ethics Commissioner?

Yes, as long as they are truly Independent and not tied to any political party or agenda.

10. What changes do you propose to improve public access to and reporting under BC’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?

I would review the Department’s needs and see why there are delays in releasing information. As well, as ensure that no part of any document is amended, prior to releasing it to the requesting party.

11. How will you ensure that all affected parties are heard before signing land transfers to industries dealing with resource extraction and that all associated environmental issues are addressed transparently?

Transparency is the issue and I would ensure that the facts from any negotiations and environmental studies are clearly understood by the riding residents. With today’s technology and internet, it is very quick and easy to gage the public’s opinion.

 

 


 

 

Independent MLA candidate William Gibbens’ responses to IntegrityBC questions for Vancouver-Point Grey by-election:

 

To read Mr. Gibben’s response please view the link below

Wayne Gibben’s response