It looks like columnists Bill Tieleman and Paul Willcocks aren't the only members of the chattering classes to take a dim view of provincial Liberal supporter Louise Burgart's appointment to the electoral boundary commission. From Dave Paulson, managing editor of Prince George Citizen, comes word that his broadsheet - the largest daily newspaper in New Democrat leader Carole James's old stomping grounds - has also come out against Ms. Burgart. In his editorial, which was published last week, Mr. Paulson writes "Whether Burgart could park her Liberal loyalties while working on the commission isn't the issue. Transparency is. To maintain the commission's integrity and ensure public confidence in a critical process, Burgart must be replaced." The following is a complete copy of that editorial.
As one of three members appointed to the province's electoral boundaries commission, Fort St. James resident Louise Burgart has a hand in redrawing the map of B.C.'s constituencies.
The commission, as specified in the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act, must be comprised of a judge or retired judge (Justice Bruce Cohen), B.C.'s chief electoral officer (Harry Neufeld) and "a person who is not a member of the legislative assembly or an employee of the government and who is nominated by the Speaker of the legislative assembly, after consultation with the premier and the leader of the Official Opposition," as stated in the Act.
Louise Burgart is the third appointee.
Oh, and the commission members are to be non-partisan; that is, they are to have no affiliation with any political party.
This should have eliminated Burgart from consideration.
Certainly she could provide valuable knowledge to the commission. Burgart is a former superintendent of the Nechako-Lakes school district, was a longtime member of the B.C. College of Teachers, is a businesswoman and as a northerner is sensitive to the realities of sprawling hinterland ridings versus urban ones.
However, she is also an active and enthusiastic supporter of the B.C. Liberal party.
As disclosed by Sean Holman on his political website Public Eye Online, Burgart's family's company, which owns Apex Alpine ski resort near Penticton, donated $1,400 to the Liberals in 1998 and another $1,500 in 2004. She also worked on the campaign to elect Prince George-Omineca MLA John Rustad, and a letter to the editor by Burgart which praised the B.C. Liberals was published in The Citizen shortly before last May's provincial election.
Penticton-Okanagan MLA Bill Barisoff, as Speaker of the House, nominated Burgart for the electoral boundaries commission. To compound the situation, the Apex ski resort Burgart owns is in Barisoff's riding and the company donated $1,000 to Barisoff's campaign in 2001, Holman writes.
Given the extremely sensitive nature of the electoral boundaries commission, Burgart is clearly an unsuitable choice despite NDP leader Carole James' approval (they've known each other since James' days as head of the provincial school trustees association). It appears the NDP didn't bother to check Burgart's background before giving its OK.
Charged with the responsibility of recommending boundary changes to B.C. ridings, the public must have every assurance the commission is acting without a shred of self-interest. A non-partisan commission is essential to prevent the perception of gerrymandering, the altering of boundaries to deliberately favour one party.
Whether Burgart could park her Liberal loyalties while working on the commission isn't the issue. Transparency is.
To maintain the commission's integrity and ensure public confidence in a critical process, Burgart must be replaced.
Last week, The Vancouver Sun's Peter O'Neil reported Conservative provincial campaign co-chair and Senator Gerry St. Germain as saying "he's prepared to resign and run for a seat in the upper chamber, but only if there are major constitutional reforms to give B.C. more seats." But before that happens, some senior Tories in this province would like to see him appointed as the government's Senate leader, giving Vancouver a voice at the cabinet table. Of course, Senator St. Germain isn't the only possible contender for that post. Other names being babbled about include David Angus, Marjory Lebreton, Hugh Segal and David Tkachuk.
Attention provincial Liberal staffers - some of your colleagues may soon be headed to Ottawa. According to our operatives, senior Conservatives are eyeing at least four Rockpile residents as possible Harper administration flacks/hacks. The Tories won't be headhunting those staffers without first consulting the premier's office. But it's hoped West Annexers see the value in having some of their underlings working in the nation's capital.
Your humble organ has done much fussing and bothering about the appointment of provincial Liberal supporter Louise Burgart to the electoral boundary commission - which has now decided its executive director doesn't need to come from a non-partisan background. That surreal decision has prompted my colleague Bill Tieleman to consider competing for the job - as noted in his 24 hours's column today. Freelance pundit Paul Willcocks also weighed in last month against Ms. Burgart's appointment to the commision. But still no word of complaint from New Democrats. The following is a complete copy of Mr. Tieleman's op-ed.
Hire non-partisan Tieleman to help draw B.C. electoral riding boundaries!
Public service is my motto.
- Al Capone, American gangster
Great news for Premier Gordon Campbell - I'm ready to go to work for his B.C. Liberal government.
Public service is my calling and I've found the perfect job opening - Executive Director of the Electoral Boundaries Commission!
You might wonder - what does the Electoral Boundaries Commission do and why on earth would the government hire a longtime thorn in its side to run it?
The Commission draws up the geographical boundaries for every riding in the B.C. Legislature. This task is extremely politically sensitive, as changing the boundaries could give one party an unfair advantage in electing MLAs.
Now, I would ordinarily have never thought of applying for this job, as I presumed it would require someone politically non-partisan.
But then I got the word from 24 hours colleague Sean Holman - having a non-partisan background isn't a job requirement! That's what the government official in charge told Holman.
Perhaps it's because B.C. Legislature Speaker Bill Barisoff has already appointed Louise Burgart to be one of the three Electoral Boundaries Commissioners.
Burgart is supposed to represent the general public, so you would think she is not involved with party politics, but you would be oh so wrong.
Burgart's company, Apex Mountain Resort, has donated $2,900 to the Liberals in the past few years, including $1,000 directly to Barisoff's Liberal campaign in 2001.
And Burgart wrote a butt-kissing letter to the Prince George Citizen newspaper praising the Campbell Liberals just a day before the 2005 election.
Neutral? You might just as well appoint former Liberal finance minister Gary Collins.
But if a partisan like Burgart isn't disqualified from being a Commissioner then why should I be ruled out for a job?
Just look at my resume. Communications Director for NDP Premier Glen Clark in 1996. NDP provincial executive member for four years. NDP donor. B.C. Federation of Labour staffer for six years.
Like Burgart, I have impeccable qualifications for the Electoral Boundaries Commission. Plus I have a master's degree in political science, specializing in British Columbia.
Still, some naysayers might worry that as the top Commission staffer, I would gerrymander the ridings' map to favour the NDP.
That's what happened in 1977 when a Commission appointed by the Social Credit government redrew the boundaries of cabinet minister Grace McCarthy's riding to add a long sliver of Vancouver that just happened to vote 80 per cent Socred.
And let's face it - I could make what became known as Gracie's Finger look like a hangnail.
But there's no rule against being partisan. Apparently you just have to be fair - and I promise I will be. Seriously. No kidding.
Now I'm just waiting for the call to start working on those riding boundaries!
Last week, we reported Ted Hughes wouldn't be releasing the public submissions made to his B.C. Children and Youth Review. The reason: according to review executive director Maureen Nicholls "there was some sense of unease (by social service agencies) in terms of the ministry knowing" their views. But special needs advocate Dawn Steele isn't afraid of publicizing her concerns.
Ms. Steele's submission notes community living activists - those who speak up for the developmentally disabled. - have "organized and communicated concerns to the Ministry, the public and politicians more effectively" than those concerned about child protection. As a result, British Columbia's child protection system hasn't received the attention or funding it deserves from government.
Ms. Steele, who criticizes plans to regionalize child protection, also notes "the reform process has politicized the bureaucracy, rewarding those who put political agendas & considerations foremost and punishing those who insist on putting children and families first." And she calls for the establishment of an independent watchdog to monitor that system. The following is a complete copy of her submission.
***
December 17, 2005
BC Children & Youth Review
Attn: Ted Hughes, QC
Dear Mr. Hughes,
Thanks for the opportunity to comment. As parent of a child with special needs, I've volunteered extensively for six years with formal and ad hoc advocacy groups re services for children and youth with special needs, community living and MCFD child/youth services in general. As such, I've engaged extensively with other parents, advocates, service providers and MCFD staff. I've provided many submissions and met with the MCFD Minister, Deputy Minister and MLAs from both sides re transformation and actual services. My comments focus on advocacy, performance monitoring, transformation, and improving services to children and youth, mostly from the perspective of special needs.
Advocacy
MCFD's community living/special needs side has traditionally had a far stronger base of family advocacy. We've organized and communicated concerns to the Ministry, the public and politicians more effectively than families on the child protection side, and we've engaged far more in ongoing reforms. This relates to having the means and clout to be heard, but creates a squeaky wheel syndrome and inequities (both within our own sector and vis a vis kids on the child protection side).
*If the onus for advocacy falls primarily on families, as it does now, political reality means those who most need help will often be last in line to get it.
*Under the current administration, the lack of strong advocacy supports for families who most need it has skewed transformation towards solutions such as community governance, individualized funding, flat rate autism funding (i.e. regardless of need). All are less helpful for families who are poorer, ESL, less educated, single parents or who can't contribute spare time and resources to get the best results.
*Deep cuts, bitter disagreement over restructuring, and the Ministry's failure to respond to input and advocacy has severely fractured & demoralized families and advocates on the special needs/adult community living side.
*Once-strong advocacy networks are barely hanging on. Over 7,000 kids with special needs are on waiting lists for MCFD services. That's likely just the tip of the iceberg. Many families no longer even request services they know will be denied indefinitely.
Whatever the shortcomings of predecessors, the Child & Youth Officer has failed to effectively advocate for individuals and for children with special needs in general. The agenda and interests of political leaders have consistently trumped MCFD's mandate to serve children and youth. Effective advocacy requires an office that is independent, politically neutral, sets its own agenda, is adequately resourced and reports to the public, though I'm no expert on how specifically one assures this. Families need effective, easily accessible mechanisms when their kids are denied reasonable, timely services. We also need someone who can paint the bigger picture effectively to guide ongoing system improvement.
Performance monitoring
The failure of performance monitoring - indeed, much of the overall problem - has a lot to do with the lack of an effective Opposition until recently. Small problems were allowed to become endemic, piling up into crises. Parents like me tried to fill the gap, spending many, many hours trying to provide input, to access and share information and enlist media attention. That experience suggests you shouldn't count on families, the media or "community" governance as watchdogs. Legislative oversight and direct Ministerial accountability isn't perfect but it works and the past few years have been anomalous. The Auditor General or someone like him should review performance regularly, reporting conclusions & suggestions for improvement publicly, in ways that the media & public can grasp. Sure there are tough judgment calls in child protection. But many of the problems are not as intractable as is often suggested. It comes down to a willingness to invest in kids, which won't happen unless the public clearly understands what's needed, what's not being provided and the human (and future economic) costs of this
Improving services: Transformation
* In the transformation that began in 2001, individuals engaged in planning have also been engaged to carry out jobs that they have in effect written for themselves - e.g. the Child & Youth Officer and key roles in CLBC. I don't know if this is normal in gov't but suggest prohibiting this in further reforms.
* The Child & Youth Officer is now urging regionalization and community governance as the solution for the troubled child protection system. That's a cop out, pure and simple. If the MCFD with all its resources and expertise hasn't solved these problems, then dumping them on local/regional bodies with little experience, expertise or resources will only add to the challenge.
* The reform process has politicized the bureaucracy, rewarding those who put political agendas & considerations foremost and punishing those who insist on putting children and families first. Ministry staff must be judged on how they live up to the mandate, first and foremost.
Improving services: Budget
* The pivotal problem and obvious solution is the one that political leaders are least interested in hearing. They have very effectively declined to hear about it, partly due to ineffective advocacy and political opposition, partly due to moves that have undermined advocacy, partly due to the skills of their "communications" experts and partly because the solution of increasing resources was antithetical to the 2001-05 political agenda of downsizing and fiscal restraint. Political leaders shouldn't be allowed to set up government systems to ensure that they don't hear what they don't want to hear.
* Budget cuts removed vital checks and balances; eroded the ability to respond to needs and encouraged reforms and programs (e.g. Kith & Kin) that were driven more by the need to meet fiscal targets than anything else. Budgets must be restored and supplemented to cover added demand and costs of reform.
* The province should not foist the problems of child protection off on communities because it is unwilling to devote the necessary resources to do a proper job, as was done for community living and kids with special needs. MCFD must demonstrate that it has successfully achieved service reforms and budget stability before any further devolution, as recommended by a series of experts, including Doug Allen's Sage Report. The experts also recommended that any new governance bodies demonstrate their readiness and capability before devolution occurred - something MCFD also ignored with CLBC.
* I seek no personal benefit in recommending this, as we currently receive more than needed via the autism program (Yes, really!).
Services for children and youth with special needs/CLBC
As mentioned, the above expert recommendations were ignored when MCFD devolved responsibility for community living and services for children and youth with special needs to CLBC on July 1, 2005. MCFD also ignored the advice that it should resolve concerns re fragmentation of children's services and that CLBC should demonstrate it was capable of serving adults successfully before any children's services were devolved. An internal audit by the Comptroller General in June 2005 that assessed readiness for the July 1 devolution acknowledged that none of this had been done. In effect, it was acknowledged, in that report and elsewhere, that all key issues remained unsolved and that CLBC may not be fully ready to carry out its responsibilities for years. This raises grave concerns for the welfare and safety of the children, youth, adults and families that now rely on this agency.
I therefore urge that you recommend the pulling back of all services for children and youth with special needs/developmental disabilities until CLBC has achieved budget stability, completed service reforms and proved that it is both fully operational and capable of adequately serving adults to the satisfaction of independent experts and/or a non-partisan, multi-stakeholder committee.
This is not exhaustive or particularly carefully thought-out, just a quick summary of key issues/ concerns that come to mind in this context, based on my experiences with MCFD. Best of luck with your task and feel free to follow up if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Dawn Steele
Much backslapping must have ensued when provincial New Democrat MLAs received the results of an internal poll showing them four percentage points ahead of the Liberals - this, according to our operatives. The poll, which was conducted by the running dog capitalists at IdeaWorks Consulting back in December, gave the Opposition around 45 percent support - providing statistical proof Carole James's leadership will take the socialists to victory in the next election. Which, of course, explains the present collegial atmosphere in caucus.
Astute Public Eye readers will be aware of the Campbell administration's Gateway Program - a $3 billion infrastructure project which the government claims will "help create a comprehensive, effective transportation network that supports improved movement of people and goods, facilitates economic growth, increases transportation choice and provides better connections to designated population growth areas." But one wonders what Finance Minister Carole Taylor thinks about those claims. Over the summer, The Vancouver Sun's Vaughn Palmer tantalizingly mentioned Ms. Taylor "during her term as a Vancouver city councillor, strongly opposed building freeways into the city to please commuters in Surrey." In fact, when the Vander Zalm government rolled out its ten year highway expansion plan (entitled Freedom to Move), she was quoted by the broadsheet's Denny Boyd on December 3, 1988 as saying "When I see words like...better port access, they're like red flags. They alarm me." The following is a complete copy of that quote, which was excavated by Public Eye.
"When I see words like third crossing, Grandview Cut, better port access, they're like red flags. They alarm me. The plan we got this week looks like a revival of the Great Freeway debate of the Seventies, when it was believed that the answer to everything was bigger, faster roads.
"Those aren't solutions to anything; they just increase the threat against our quality of life, they just give us more traffic, more pollution, more threats to residential neighborhood.
"When I see the suggestion that the Grandview Cut be used to move people and to move goods, I see another Spadina Expressway, bumper-to-bumper trucks and cars cutting right through a residential neighborhood and crashing up against the heart of the city.
"The problem with decisions like these is that the consequences aren't seen for 10 years, when it's too late.
"I think one answer would be for Vancouver to be less greedy. We want more housing in downtown Vancouver, we want most of the commercial space to be downtown. But we're going to have to share that development with the regions, spread it around with co-operative regional planning, share the growth.
"If we can do that, and then link the regions with a transit system that a secretary and a business executive will both agree is a comfortable alternative to driving their own cars to work, then we can protect the quality of life we all want."
Tonight, on Public Eye Radio, Democracy Watch coordinator Duff Conacher will join us to talk about whether Tory Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Accountability Act will put him out of a job. Provincial New Democrat social housing critic Doug Routley is also coming on the program with The Times Colonist's Jody Paterson and Marlene Goley from The Cridge Centre for the Family to discuss proposed changes to the way social housing is delivered in British Columbia. Federal Liberal gadfly Jonathan Ross and Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca MP Keith Martin will give their thoughts on the upcoming Grit leadership race. And our rabble-rousing political panel - Will McMartin, Bob Russell and Brad Zubyk - will be weighing in about the week that was in politics. You can listen to Public Eye Radio outside of Victoria by logging into CFAX 1070 between 8:00 and 9:00. If you have a question for one of our guests, you can email us, leave a comment below or phone (250) 386-1161 during the show.
Provincial New Democrat MLAs are back from their excursion to sunny Prince George. But what did they talk about at their meeting? Well, according to our operatives, there was some discussion about the election of the party's caucus officers (excluding the house leader post occupied by Mike Farnworth) - who were initially appointed by Carole James following the campaign. But the fact two MLAs weren't at that meeting scuttled plans to cast ballots then and there. And no date was set for a future vote tallying exercise. But there should be much interest in the results when caucus members do go to the polls.
Last month, we reported the Non-Partisan Association's caucus would be meeting on January 28. But that schmooze-fest has since been postponed without being re-scheduled. Could this be the result of the recent bout of bloodletting on the association's board of directors, which culminated in an extraordinary phone call between Alex Tsakumis and brother muckraker Allen Garr? Meanwhile, in other daytimer news, the provincial New Democrats will be having the first provincial council meeting since convention on February 19 at The Empire Landmark Hotel. That meeting will be preceded by a party executive strategy session on Febuary 4, where bigwigs will be doing some deep thinking on how to keep the New Democrat membership occupied for the next four years. Might we suggest shiny things as one option? The following is a copy of the email announcing the council meeting.
From: Joanne Banfield
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 11:35 AM
Subject: FEBRUARY PROVINCIAL COUNCIL NOTICE
Provincial Council Delegates
Provincial Constituency Presidents
Provincial Executive
MPS/MLAS
A reminder that the deadline to book your hotel for the February Provincial Council is today and the deadline for receiving Notices of Motion is tomorrow. Please also find attached a copy of the revised draft October 2005 minutes.
________________________________
To: Provincial Council Delegates
Constituency Presidents
Provincial Executive
NDP MLAS/MPS
BC NDP PROVINCIAL COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
The next Provincial Council meeting will be held Saturday, February 18 from 9:00 to 5:00 pm (approximate) and Sunday, February 19 from 9:00 to 12 noon (approximate).
Thursday, January 26 is our deadline to book guest rooms. After this time, the hotel may be full, or may charge higher rates. Please call the hotel's toll-free reservations number (1-800-830-6144) and identify yourself as part of the BC NDP meetings. Our rate is $80 single or double. Please be advised that the hotel will ask for a credit card to hold the room.
Meeting Location: The Empire Landmark Hotel (Crystal Ballroom), 1400 Robson Street Vancouver.
Parking: The parking lot at the hotel is $10 per day. Enter from Robson Street. For those delegates staying in the hotel guest rooms, you may charge your parking fee to your room.
Closest SkyTrain: Burrard Station next to the Hyatt Hotel.
travel: Please book air travel in advance to take advantage of discount airfares. Unionized carriers are given priority. All transportation costs will be paid equivalent to the cheapest form of transport available.
Expense CLAIMS: Complete a General Expense Claim form (available at registration) and attach all receipts and leave with Party staff. Hotel, parking for hotel guests and taxes will be charged directly to the Party account.
Notices of Motion: A reminder that only Notices of Motion that are received by Provincial Office three weeks in advance of the Council meeting will be given priority at the meeting. Please submit your Notices of Motion by email to Joanne Banfield at joanneb@bc.ndp.ca
DELEGATE ORIENTATION: There will be a one hour orientation session for new and/or first-time delegates on Saturday at 8:00 am. Space is limited so please pre- register prior to January 27 by email to Joanne at joanneb@bc.ndp.ca.
cope 15
Earlier, we reported rental and construction representatives have been lobbying the Campbell administration for the past four or five years to introduce rental supplements for lower-income families. But those efforts have been paralleled by a similar campaign on the national stage. The Canadian Federation of Apartment Association has long made those supplements one of its principal political goals. The Canadian Home Builders' Association and the Urban Development Institute of Canada - which represents property developers - have also been supporting that campaigning. And, in a 2005 memorandum, the federation crowed its "activities had a direct influence on Housing Minister (Joe) Fontana's decision to allow federal funding to be used for rent supplements or housing allowances. That was a specific goal CFAA set at our 2004 Conference and AGM." That decision meant unused funding allocated under federal-provincial-territorial housing agreements could now be used for those programs. And we can likely expect more discussion of supplements when the country's housing ministers meet in Vancouver this June - a pow-wow that will be co-chaired by our very own Rich Coleman.
Earlier, we asked the provincial electoral boundary commission whether their executive director would be required to come from a non-partisan background. After all, the citizens' assembly on electoral reform refused to hire future New Democrat MLA Claire Trevena as their communications director because of her politics. But, apparently, the boundary commissioners - who include Liberal supporter Louise Burgart - have decided the same standard doesn't apply to their senior staffer. The reason: in an email sent to Public Eye, the members wrote the executive director will be "responsible for providing the Commission's infrastructure and coordinating the activities of others" but will not be "in a position to make recommendations on behalf of the Commission." And that means anyone from Gerry Scott to Kelly von Reichert (Public Eye passim) could conceivably be hired to that post. The following is a complete copy of that email.
From: Atherton, Betty-Ann AG:EX
Sent: 26 January 2006 10:50
To: Sean Holman
Subject: RE: Electoral Boundaries Commission executive director contract
Dear Mr. Holman
In response to your question, the British Columbia Electoral Boundaries Commissioners provide the following answer:
Each supporting role for the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission (BC-EBC) will be appropriately staffed and resourced based on the requirements of the position.
All contractors and staff working with or employed by the Commission will be required to conduct themselves in a manner that does not compromise public confidence or the independence of the Commission. This is a management practice the Commission will follow to ensure that stakeholder confidence is maintained.
The Executive Director is responsible for providing the Commission's infrastructure and coordinating the activities of others. However, the person filling the role will not be a Commissioner and, as with other contractors and staff of the Commission, will not be in a position to make recommendations on behalf of the Commission.
The Executive Director of the BC-EBC will not act as a spokesperson of the Commission. When communications personnel are selected, the need for neutrality will be addressed as part of the selection process.
If you have further questions, please contact me at your convenience. Thank you
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Holman [mailto:editorial@publiceyeonline.com]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 11:27 AM
To: Atherton, Betty-Ann AG:EX
Subject: Electoral Boundaries Commission executive director contract
Is there a requirement for applicants to be non-partisan or not have a partisan background? I ask because, previously, the citizens' assembly was forced to withdraw an offer of employment to a prospective communications director because of her partisan connections.
Earlier, we reported British Columbia New Democrat provincial secretary Gerry Scott would be heading off into the sunset. But who's replacing him? According to our operatives, former Alberta party secretary Laura Nichols - who worked as Carole James's anchor during the recent election campaign - is the winning candidate. Others considered for the posting were former Vision Vancouver campaign manager Ian Reid and party organizer Sandra Houston.
Yesterday, we reported rumours some federal Liberals think David Emerson should run as a leadership candidate - providing a rallying point for British Columbia party members. But not everyone is happy Mr. Emerson, who was re-elected in Vancouver-Kingsway, made it back into Parliament. According to the rumourmill, some provincial Liberals were hoping for his defeat - not because they bear him any ill will but because they wanted the former deputy minister and forestry executive back on their team.
Astute readers will remember that, last year, the provincial government appointed respected former jurist and conflict of interest commissioner Ted Hughes to head an independent review into British Columbia's much criticized child protection system. As part of that review, Mr. Hughes received more than 200 public submissions commenting on the state of that system. But don't expect to be able to read those submissions without the assistance of a freedom of information request. In an interview with your humble organ, the review executive director Maureen Nicholls confirmed the documents won't be made public.
"It was really a decision in terms of people feeling that they could be more fulsome if their privacy was maintained. And we heard a number of people from the community express a similar view. And we thought that - if we wanted to get their views and if wanted to encourage people to make submissions - we needed to give them a sense of security."
And why do they feel the need for that security? "I would only be speculating. But my sense is there was some sense of unease (by social service agencies) in terms of the ministry knowing," their views, said Ms. Nicholls. Although she added, "I'm presume that's mostly perceptual. But I don't know." Nevertheless, such perceptions are a damning comment on the government's present relationship with those agencies.
Rental housing and construction industry representatives are cheering changes to the way the government shelters its most vulnerable citizens - a proposal that was questioned earlier this week by social housing advocates. In an interview with Public Eye, Rental Owners and Managers Association of British Columbia chief executive officer Al Kemp said he was "100 percent in favour" of public statements by provincial Housing Minister Rich Coleman that seem to suggest the province will shift focus from funding social housing to handing out supplements so low-income families can live in private sector dwellings.
"What we basically advocate - and the minister is saying the same thing - is that government should get out of providing housing except for people with special needs," explained Mr. Kemp. "The private sector is not good at having an apartment building with a renter who has schizophrenia and goes off her medication or an elderly renter who really needs assistance because she doesn't even remember to turn the stove off."
And why should government put the brakes on constructing and managing social housing? "Like anything," said Mr. Kemp, "the private sector does it more effectively and cost-effectively." He also said government just doesn't have enough money to keep up with the demand for those dwellings - a demand that can be met with private sector vacancies.
And British Columbia Apartment Owners and Managers Association chief executive officer Lynda Pasacreta added that rental supplements allow families "get to choose the neighborhoods they want to live in and choose the community they want to live in" - rather than confining them to a social housing project.
So, said Mr. Kemp, "there's a whole bunch of reasons we think its good government policy - good practice...And obviously it doesn't hurt our industry."
The two associations have been lobbying the government to introduce rental supplements since the Campbell administration's first term in office. "Rich and I have had informal conversation or coffee conversations over the last five or six years," - even before the minister became responsible for social housing, said Mr. Kemp. "And this is one of the things we talked about."
The Canadian Home Builders' Association of British Columbia has also lobbied the government about this matter. And it was at their annual crystal ball session where Minister Coleman, who previously ran a real estate management and consulting company, elaborated on his social housing proposal. A version of this article will be published in tomorrow's edition of 24 hours.
Terminal City will host the upcoming federal Liberal leadership convention if Jamie Elmhirst has his way. In an interview with Public Eye, the British Columbia party president confirmed he'll be submitting such a request to the party's executive. Meanwhile, our operatives report there's some thinking in Grit Lotusland that said conference should be scheduled no sooner but no later than this fall. The reason: that's enough time to give candidates a chance to organize and debate the issues but not enough time to let the leadership race fester. Meanwhile, famed Grit gadfly Jonathan Ross is reporting whispers that the executive will set that date sometime this week. Also treading on the rumourmill: thoughts that David Emerson should be encouraged to run for the Liberal leadership - not necessarily because he'd win the race but instead because he'd be a rallying point for British Columbia Grits, thereby keeping the provincial voting block intact.
Yesterday, we told you the province's three principal social housing groups were raising serious questions about Housing Minister Rich Coleman's plans to change the way the province shelters some of its most vulnerable citizens. And now it seems provincial New Democrat housing critic Doug Routley has thrown his two cents into the debate. In a news release posted earlier this morning, Mr. Routley slammed suggestions the government should "shift from owning (and building) housing projects, which stigmatize and ghettoize low-income people, to providing rent subsidies toward privately owned units." According to Mr. Routley "Affordable housing is a complex issue that cannot be solved with only targeted rent supplements. This decision is not only bad for families, but for all British Columbians."
Conservation Voters of British Columbia coordinator Matt Price is waving the warning flag in front of the premier's decision to contract labour negotiations work to former deputy minister Lee Doney. Noting that Mr. Doney's company RLD Strategies Ltd. contributed $500 to the provincial Liberals during the last election campaign, Mr. Price wrote in an email to Public Eye that Mr. Doney's contract "raises the spectre of what has been considered, until now perhaps, a federal issue: donors getting contracts. Not only should non-voter donations be banned in order to avoid these kinds of things, but anyone who has financial dealings with the government should be prohibited from campaign contributions as an individual for a period of time in order to avoid the perception of corruption."
Earlier, we reported on former deputy minister Lee Doney's double-dipping - collecting a government pension while working under contract for the premier's office. That practice is by no means a rarity. But it's unlikely New Democrat MLAs will be raising much of a hue and cry about the matter. Last month, brother muckraker Russ Francis wrote Uncle H.A.D. Oliver, British Columbia's conflict of interest comforter/commissioner, ruled MLAs who had been elected to the legislature following an absence could continue collecting their old MLA pension package while being paid for their present work at the Rockpile.
Earlier, we reported former deputy minister Lee Doney would be collecting his pension while working on a 10-month, $200,000 contract for the premier's office. As your humble organ has already observed, many senior retired bureaucrats do the same thing. But what does Mr. Doney think about the practice? In an interview yesterday with Public Eye, he defended such contracts, noting government is "asking (former civil servants) to come in and give up the opportunity to make money working in the private sector. And it's for short-term work. It's not like you're going to get five years of work out of this. We're talking ten months - shorter maybe." Mr. Doney also said his present contract "isn't a rich contract by any means...If you work 22 days a month, divided by a $20,000 retainer, it's less than $1,000 in an eight-hour day. And it's $150 an hour. As a deputy, I was probably making more than that."
The province's three principal social housing groups are raising serious questions about Housing Minister Rich Coleman's plans to change the way the province shelters some of its most vulnerable citizens. Based on public statements made by the minister, those plans would appear to shift the province's focus from building such housing to giving low-income families rental supplements so they can live in private sector dwellings. But Tenants Rights Action Coalition executive director Martha Lewis said it was, "dangerously simplistic to say that the option is either subsidies or funding social housing." Rental supplements, she explained, are "not a long-term solution. They're a Band-Aid. It's more expensive, in the long-run, to use taxpayers' money to subsidize landlords." The reason: social housing may cost a lot to build in the short-run. But, unlike an apartment building, it doesn't need to turn a profit.
Ms. Lewis also pointed out those receiving rental supplements may not find an appropriate roof in such a tight rental market. According to the latest numbers from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp., the vacancy rate in Vancouver is just 1.4 percent. And it's even lower in the provincial capital, coming in at 0.5 percent.
A far better plan, says Alice Sunberg, executive director of the B.C. Non-Profit Housing Association, would be to introduce those supplements but continue funding social housing - paying equal attention to each initiative. And she raised concerns about suggestions the government will use the province's projects to shelter only the most difficult-to-house cases. "If they're all concentrated in one place, isn't that a ghetto?"
Neither the coalition, the association nor the Co-operative Housing Federation of B.C., say they have been consulted about Minister Coleman's plans - which were hinted at during estimates debate in the fall. Those hints were elaborated on by the minister at the Canadian Home Builders' Association of British Columbia's annual crystal ball earlier this month - an announcement covered, in brief, by the Times Colonist's Joanne Hatherly.
In Ms. Hatherly's report, which was buried on Page B3, Minister Coleman was paraphrased as saying "the government wants to shift from owning housing projects, which stigmatize and ghettoize low-income people, to providing rent subsidies toward privately owned units." And he stated "the B.C. strategy would be implemented in stages...and does not involve selling current government housing. The intent is to eventually use it for hard-to house people, such as those suffering from mental illness and addiction."
B.C. Housing Corp. chief executive officer Shayne Ramsay said he wasn't able to the concerns of social housing advocates or say whether they were valid "because the strategy hasn't been formally announced. It really is up to the minister." And the minister is on vacation until next week. A version of this article will be published in tomorrow's edition of 24 hours.
Former deputy minister Lee Doney may now be working in the premier's office as a special advisor on labour bargaining. But it appears this isn't his first job with the provincial government since retiring. According to public accounts, government transferred $111,469 to his company RLD Strategies Ltd. in fiscal 2004/05. Not bad. And it seems Mr. Doney has been generous with that money. According to Elections British Columbia, RLD Strategies contributed $500 to the Liberals during the recent provincial campaign.
Earlier, your humble organ reported former deputy minister Lee Doney would be collecting his pension while under contract with the premier's office. Of course, Mr. Doney isn't the first nor will he be the last senior civil servant to do so. After all, the provincial government presently has no policies preventing such perceived double-dipping. But the federal government's contracting guidelines do include strong language surrounding the hiring of civil service pensioners. According to those guidelines "contracts with a former employee receiving a government pension may prompt accusations that public funds are being abused or that influence was improperly exerted in the contract award, particularly if those involved occupied more senior positions or took early retirement." And "if the contract work is substantially like that performed by the pensioner before retirement, contracting authorities should ensure that they can justify why the work is not being done by a successor." For example, a former labour deputy minister being hired as the premier's special advisor on labour bargaining?
Our astute readers will, of course, be familiar with the sainted Lee Doney. A senior bureaucrat with more than 30 years of experience in the civil service, the craggy deputy minister of labour retired back in April 2004 - an occasion commemorated with a column penned by The Vancouver Sun's Vaughn Palmer. But a little more than a year later, the premier's office has announced he'll be working under contract as Gordon Campbell's special advisor on labour bargaining. And how much will he be making as a special advisor, you may wonder? Well, it turns out Mr. Doney will earn a maximum of $200,000 over the ten months covered by that contract - which was awarded to his company RLD Strategies Ltd. A fair sum perhaps - given his experience and the fact he will be on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week. But let us not forget that, while working on this contract, he will continue collecting his collecting his government pension - which could be perceived as double-dipping.
Wanted: executive director for the electoral boundary commission. Qualifications: "managing complex multi-million dollar projects or enterprises" - this according to an advertisement posted on BC Bid. But no mention is made of the successful applicant being non-partisan. That's somewhat curious. After all, our astute readers will remember the tragic episode (reported by The Vancouver Sun's Vaughn Palmer) wherein the citizens' assembly on electoral reform refused to hire future New Democrat MLA Claire Trevena as their communications director. The reason: she had been a senior member of the Green Party, which was advocating for proportional representation. So shouldn't the executive director for the boundary commission have to meet a similar standard of non-involvement when it comes to their past political background?
This was the question we posed to Betty-Ann Atherton, the acting managing of procurement support for the attorney general's ministry and the woman responsible for the contract. Her response: "To provide you with a complete answer, I have referred this question to the British Columbia Electoral Boundaries Commissioners. Their next meeting is on Wednesday January 25, 2006 after which I will provide a response to you on Thursday." Of course, this will likely present our dear friend Louise Burgart and her colleagues on the commission with an interesting dilemma: how can they require their executive director to be non-partisan when Ms. Burgart clearly is not? The following is a copy of the relevant portion of that contract posting.
***
B. Requirements and Response
1. SUMMARY OF THE REQUIREMENT
The British Columbia Electoral Boundaries Commission (BC-EBC) was appointed by the government in December 2005. Its mandate is to make recommendations for electoral boundaries under the current electoral system and under a Single Transferable Vote system. The Commission will seek community input through province wide consultation and submit an initial report to the Legislature by August 2007 and a final report by March 2008. The Commission will be located in Vancouver and will have up to 25 researchers, communications, technical and other staff.
The BC-EBC requires a Contractor from approximately February 2006 until February 2008 to be responsible for the planning, managing and monitoring of each phase and element of the BC-EBC's work.
2. ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS
In addition to the RFP Definitions set out in paragraph 1 of Section A, throughout this Request for Proposal, the following definitions will apply:
"Commission" means an administrative entity appointed by an elected body to accomplish a particular objective within a limited timeframe;
"Personal Service Contract" means a contract with an individual to provide a specific service.
3. MINISTRY SITUATION/OVERVIEW
3.1 Division Responsibility
The Electoral Boundaries Commission is an independent commission appointed under the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act, as amended. Under the Act the BC-EBC is reconstituted following every second election to assess and make recommendations on constituency boundaries.
The BC-EBC liaises with the Finance and Administration Division of the Management Services Branch, Ministry of Attorney General on general administrative matters.
3.2 Background
The mandate of the BC-EBC has been statutorily expanded and the timeframe for its deliberations extended to 26 months. This is to give the BC-EBC more time to consult and provide recommendations on 2 possible scenarios for elections boundaries for the next provincial election which is scheduled to be held on May 12, 2009.
Scenario 1 - Boundaries to be amended under the current first-past-the-post electoral system.
Scenario 2 - Boundaries to be amended if electoral reform meets thresholds of required support in a referendum on the single transferable vote system which will take place during the November 2008 municipal elections.
3.3 Project Scope
The purpose of the RFP is to contract with a successful Proponent who will be responsible for planning, managing and monitoring each phase and element of the BC-EBC's work. The scope of responsibility includes engaging operational staff; ensuring contracts are in place for required services; developing and monitoring budgets; organizing public hearings, public communications, media liaison, public education, analysis; and producing two formal published reports to the Legislature.
The attached Appendix C gives a general indication of the organizational functions of the BC-EBC.
The Contractor will be paid for services on submission and BC-EBC's approval of a monthly invoice (twelve (12) equal payments of the proposed annual fee).
4. REQUIREMENTS
4.1 Capabilities
4.1.1 Qualifications
Proponents should name specific individuals to provide the services described in this RFP who have specialization and/or specific knowledge of:
* Leading or managing a Commission or similar entity; and,
* Managing complex multi-million dollar projects or enterprises using project management tools and techniques including leadership, communication and team-building skills.
The above specialization and/or knowledge should have been gained through experience working for or contracting with a Commission or similar entity, and being the project manager on projects valued over one million dollars.
NOTE: The BC-EBC prefers individuals with a university degree in business or equivalent academic qualification.
NOTE: The BC-EBC strongly prefers that the individual named under this section be available for the duration of the Contract. Any changes to the named individual will require the prior, written approval of the BC-EBC.
4.1.2 Experience
The individual should have a minimum of five (5) years experience providing services of a similar nature. Services of a similar nature are defined as including the following elements:
a) Managing an independent Commission or similar entity;
b) Managing multiple projects simultaneously including accurately projecting expenditures and work effort and preparing progress and final reports;
c) Managing budgets and forecasts and exercising spending authority in accordance with appropriate Acts and policies;
d) Strategic and business planning and policy and procedure development;
e) Managing communications and media issues including advertising, website development and public education;
f) Liaising with government entities or agencies;
g) Planning, organizing and coordinating administrative, professional, and research staff within a public sector, legislative, policy oriented and operational environment;
h) Hiring and subsequently monitoring the performance of staff and/or contractors;
i) Managing Personal Service Contracts to ensure that the deliverables are met.
Earlier, your humble organ reported Community Living British Columbia board Joan Rush told a First Call meeting the agency was asking for a $40 million budget increase for special needs children services in its Treasury Board submission. But, since then, we've been informed Ms. Rush asked First Call to strike her statement from the meeting minutes because she could not be sure about that number - which, we're assured, is incorrect.
Our astute readers will, of course, be familiar with the Community Living Coalition - the lobby group that was fathered, in part, by Doug Walls and ultimately gave birth to the provincial government's independent authority for developmentally disabled adults. Established in November 2001, the group's "immediate goals were 1) address threatened cutbacks to community living services and supports; 2) develop a new governance structure for community living; 3) promote Individualized Funding as an option for individuals and families." But with at least two of those goals being accomplished, there was some discussion among members that the coalition should be disbanded. And that proposal came up for debate at a group meeting earlier this month. But, according to those familiar with the debate, it was decided the coalition would "carry out in a relatively quiet role" except around the role of community councils at Community Living British Columbia - as well as budgetary and access issues.
What happens when you put the woman responsible for the province's purse strings in the same room as the man in charge of British Columbia's labour movement? We'll find out Friday, when Carole Taylor and Jim Sinclair are scheduled to discuss the upcoming round of public sector labour negotiations, which are expected to dominate government's spring agenda. No actual bargaining will take place at that meeting. But Mr. Sinclair will be seeking further clarification on the new negotiation framework Minister Taylor rolled out on November 30.
Public Eye has made much ado about provincial Liberal supporter Louise Burgart's appointment to the supposedly non-partisan electoral boundary commission. Up until now, though, the provincial New Democrat caucus leadership has seemed somewhat reluctant to make much of a public fuss about Ms. Burgart - despite the fact former boundary commissioner Katherine Hough, ex-premier Bill Vander Zalm and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association have been ringing alarm bells about her appointment. We won't dwell on the reason for that silence. But those who are concerned about the possibility and perception of gerrymandering created by Ms. Burgart's presence of the commission will be somewhat relieved to know former party president and Surrey-Whalley MLA Bruce Ralston has been assigned to look into the matter.
Our astute readers will, of course, be familiar with Lorne Sivertson. He's the aspiring stand-up comedian who recently retired as president of the Columbia Power Corp. - the hen house to the Columbia Basin Trust's den of foxes. And what, you may ask, is he doing with his retirement years? Well, like so many of his counterparts in the provincial government, Mr. Sivertson has put up his shingle as a consultant. The following is a portion of his sales pitch.
Sivertson & Associates
Consulting Ltd.
Introduction
* Sivertson & Associates Consulting Ltd. is a British Columbia company formed late in 2005 by Lorne Sivertson, former President and Chief Executive Officer of Columbia Power Corporation.
* Lorne Sivertson has extensive national and international experience in the energy and resource sectors gained from his work in industry, investment banking, government, non-government organizations and most recently Columbia Power Corporation (please see attached CV).
* Lorne Sivertson has an impressive record of achievement in project planning, execution and management as well as being recognized as a skilled policy advisor at the provincial and national levels.
* President and CEO since its inception and having taken Columbia Power Corporation from a “paper company” in 1994 through the project development phase into the operations phase, Lorne Sivertson decided to step down from his position so that he could stay involved in project development and policy formulation, areas of his expertise and interest.
Sectors of Focus
* Sivertson & Associates Consulting Ltd. focus on providing professional advisory services in:
- electricity generation and transmission;
- oil, natural gas and coal production;
- metal mining and exploration; and
- resource project related infrastructure (road, rail, transmission lines, airports).
Advisory Services
* Sivertson & Associates Consulting Ltd. add value for clients in:
- project planning, negotiations, facilitation and procurement;
- project finance, joint venture structuring, strategic alliances and governance models;
- regulatory approvals and government liaison;
- investment opportunity identification and feasibility analysis;
- public-private-partnership (P3) initiatives;
- contract structuring, dispute resolution, litigation support; and
- energy, resource and industrial policy analysis and implementation.
Contact Information
* Sivertson & Associates Consulting Ltd. can be reached through:
Lorne Sivertson, President
E-mail: lorne.sivertson@shaw.ca
Taxpayers will be spending millions on a computer system mega-project allowing doctors to request lab tests and access the results online. In an interview, health communications director Marisa Adair said she couldn't confirm the exact value of the contract due to competitiveness concerns except to say "It's in the tens of millions" of dollars. But two insiders familiar with that multi-year deal (which will cover development and ongoing maintenance and administration costs) estimated the number considerably higher, with one calling it a "$400 million adventure" - information Ms. Adair says is incorrect. And what about the privacy concerns surrounding a system that will be carrying such sensitive information? Ms. Adair didn't specifically address those worries, except to say, "Privacy and patient confidentiality - as in all our e-health initiatives - is a critical component of the project. So it's got to be compliant with FOIPPA. And we have tough privacy measures that are among the strongest in Canada in terms of ensuring this." The lab contract, which will be jointly funded by the provincial and federal governments, is expected to be posted sometime next month. The following is a copy of the day-after-Boxing Day news release announcing that contract.
December 27, 2005
Development Of A Provincial Laboratory Information Solution (PLIS) For British Columbia Begins
The Provincial Laboratory Coordinating Office (PLCO) is leading the development of a Provincial Laboratory Information Solution (PLIS) for British Columbia.
The PLCO and the Ministry of Health are seeking a service provider through a Joint Solution Procurement Process to build, implement and operate PLIS for the Province. The common services and E-Health infrastructure components needed to support exchange of clinical lab information and other clinical data will also be examined.
Using the Joint Solution Procurement Process, PLIS and the supporting infrastructure will be implemented by leveraging the combined capability, creativity and strengths of both the public and private sectors to create the best possible solution for BC's health and laboratory system.
The overall guiding vision for PLIS is to provide access to clinical laboratory information (results, orders and decision support) to care providers at the point of care anywhere in British Columbia. This will increase efficiency, enhance clinical decision support and reduce duplication of tests in the laboratory system in this province.
PLIS is a key initiative in the Ministry of Health's E-Health strategy that will develop the Electronic Health Record and supporting IT infrastructure for health care in British Columbia. PLIS is a key component within the PLCO's overall lab services transformation activities.
The Joint Solution Procurement Process will likely commence in early 2006 with the posting of a Joint Solution Request for Proposal on BC Bid.
In the meantime, the PLCO will be disseminating information about the opportunity to the vendor community. In advance of the posting of the Joint Solution Request for Proposal, the PLCO will conduct a Live Meeting information session on Monday, January 9th, for vendors interested in learning more about the PLIS initiative.
Additional information on the next steps regarding the PLIS Joint Solution process will be provided in the weeks following this information session.
Is the provincial government preaching labour peace while preparing for war? That's what our operatives are wondering, after receiving reports Ipos-Reid Corp. is polling on public sector labour issues. Among the questions: under what conditions would you support the government imposing a contract? If there was a minor service disruption, a major service disruption or if a mediator determined no deal was possible? In an interview, Ipsos-Reid public affairs vice-president Kyle Braid said he could neither confirm nor deny whether the company was conducting such a survey or who the firm might be working for. "We're in the field all the time on public issues and we may or may not be doing that right now." Although he did add "it's a topic we've done before...but mostly for ourselves." Mr. Braid also said, if Ipsos-Reid was doing such a poll for themselves rather than a client, he would be able to confirm the survey's existence.
A former electoral boundary commissioner is calling for the removal of a Liberal supporter who was recently appointed to do the same supposedly non-partisan job. In an exclusive interview, Katherine Hough, an Anglican priest, also said it was "inappropriate" for Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Bill Barisoff to have made that appointment because he received campaign donations from the new commissioner's company. Ms. Hough, who noted Mr. Barisoff was upset when her 1999 boundary commission chopped up his riding, explained "the legislation calls for a non-partisan appointment to do that work. And (the Liberals) have discovered they have erred in that. So they need to take the high road, rescind the appointment and get someone who fits the criteria...Or, better yet, (Louise Burgart) should withdraw once she realizes that this is a non-partisan appointment."
Ms. Hough, who has worked as a provincial criminal prosecutor, found it surprising Ms. Burgart wasn't screened out of the boundary commissioner selection process. The reason: when Ms. Hough was approached about becoming a commissioner, she was specifically told "that the appointment for someone who had no affiliation with any political party. And that was one of the criteria they were looking for. And I was able to...assure them of that. Whereas, it appears those were not questions that were addressed to her."
Ms. Hough added it was important for Ms. Burgart to step down to avoid any possibility or perceived possibility of gerrymandering - manipulating riding boundaries to favour one party over another. And Ms. Hough worried the appointment of Liberal campaigner to the commission would set a precedent for future partisan appointments. "You would get larger vehicles being driven through that particular hole until the term non-partisan becomes meaningless," she said.
Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy and her longtime supporter Gerrie van Ieperen appear to have been involved with an initiative to counter the media's perceived left-wing bias via the blogosphere, according to a collection of emails leaked to Public Eye. The emails, which date back to early last year and have not yet been verified as authentic, discuss a document entitled "Exposing the left-wing media filter." The document, written by then Victoria constituency association director-at-large Eugene Parks, proposes organizing a team of writers and analysts who would "point out instances of unbalanced or biased news reporting" via a "respected and credible blog site."
According to Ms. van Ieperen's emails, Ms. Ablonczy received, reviewed and distributed the document, as well as attempting to "round up support" for the initiative. And, in a message sent to Mr. Parks via her husband Ron Sauer's email address, Ms. Ablonczy writes she is "still waiting for feedback" concerning the blogging plan. "Has been quite positive so far in verbal discussions. Have asked for email feedback and will forward what I receive." It is unclear whether Mr. Parks, who resigned his position and left the Conservatives in July, ever received that feedback.
Madams van Ieperen and Ablonczy also appear to have approached Maurice Murphy, a prominent former party activist in Ontario, about participating in the initiative. But he refused, noting the Conservatives problems did not "relate to the Star or the Globe and Mail, after all they are balanced by the National Post and the Sun media. So, for me, an Anti-left media blog would be a lot of effort for very little return."
Ms. Ablonczy has not yet responded to an interview request placed through her campaign manager earlier yesterday morning. Nor has she authenticated the emails, which have been forwarded to her campaign office for review. Attempts to contact Ms. van Ieperen at her home haven't been successful.
***
-----Original Message-----
From: ron [mailto:ronsauer@shaw.ca]
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 12:37 PM
To: elparks@shaw.ca
Subject: RE: Blogs
Have asked Gerrie to forward two relevant articles. Will call you this week to brainstorm. Cheers, D.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Parks [mailto:elparks@shaw.ca]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 4:05 PM
To: Ablonczy Sauer
Subject: Blogs
Hi Diane,
Where do we stand on getting a blog team going?
Eugene
***
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerrie van Ieperen [mailto:gvanieperen@shaw.ca]
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 12:10 PM
To: Eugene Parks
Subject: Fw: Are blogs journalism's new wave -- or just public forums for the bored?
Eugene, Diane asked me to send this to you (the attachment is the Time Magazine article she talked to you about).
Gerrie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerrie van Ieperen"
To: "Diane"
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: Are blogs journalism's new wave -- or just public forums for the bored?
Byline: Chris Cobb
Outlet: The Ottawa Citizen
Title: Dear Diary: Are blogs journalism's new wave -- or just public forums for the bored?
Page: C5
Date: 2005-01-30
Source: The Ottawa Citizen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depending on the day, a search for the word "blogs" on Google or Yahoo will net you about 37 million sites -- give or take two or three million.
Blog is Internetspeak for weblogs, as in World Wide Web (www) and log, a journal of ongoing events. A random poll would reveal that most people have little idea what a weblog is, but that is rapidly changing. As bloggers edge into mainstream journalism, either by chance or deliberately, they are influencing events and having to deal with issues of accuracy, trust and ethics.
Last year, the word "blog" was the most searched on the Merriam-Webster online dictionary and according to a new study by the U.S. Pew Internet and American Life Project, blog readership increased more than 58 per cent last year with seven per cent of the 120 million American adults who use the Internet saying they have created a blog or web-based diary.
In the U.S. alone, that's eight million people. (There are no equivalent Canadian studies but patterns of Internet use in Canada are not usually dissimilar to those of the U.S.).
So weblog growth is significant, but the Pew study confirms that only 38 per cent of Internet users know what a weblog is.
Without visiting all 37 million sites coughed up by Internet search engines, it is safe to assume that most blogs are not worth the cyberspace they occupy. The bulk are boring or offensive self-indulgences produced by those with axes to grind, prejudice to spew, porn to peddle or without the ability to get past the gatekeepers at newspapers, magazines, book publishers and edited online publications.
Some, however, are proving influential in political and media circles, an influence emphasized during the 2004 election season in Canada and the U.S.
It was the blogging community that first raised doubts about documents used by CBS news in its story of President George W. Bush's questionable military service record and, in Canada, bloggers who hastened the spread of Conservative veteran MP Randy White's ill-timed comments on the Constitution that many pundits say helped his party snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Political bloggers are also becoming popular on mainstream TV where they are introduced by the more gravitas-tinged title "online political commentators."
During the federal election campaign last June, several Canadian politicians had their own weblogs but according to Jim Elve, publisher of blog directory and resource site BlogsCanada, they were half-hearted, ineffective and guilty of one of the most common ailments that kills blogs: lack of frequent updates.
Ontario-based Elve created a temporary election component on BlogsCanada, which itself is a growing directory of more than 9,000 blogs. He began soliciting political bloggers of all shades of opinion last January and once the election campaign got rolling, his Group Election Blog site was getting 2,000 visitors a day.
On election day, 3,500 readers visited the site.
"BlogsCanada E-group gave Canadian voters what they wanted," Elve told the online Blog Herald. "In-depth, well-researched articles from the grass roots, links to countless other sources and the ability to interact without restriction."
Of the thousands of messages processed through the group, Elve said he only had to delete two contributions, one of which was a plagiarized verbatim magazine article.
Elves says his BlogsCanada directory, which this week passed the millionth visitor mark, is getting between 150 to 200 new submissions each week, from Canadians in this co