Saturday, November 08, 2008
Reponse to Shingle Qestions
Final Answers to Questions for Trust Candidates:
1. How long have you been a full-time resident of Gabriola, and what contributions to the Gabriola community have you made?
I must admit this question took me by surprise, as how long someone has lived somewhere says absolutely nothing about their ability to represent the community. I have lived here for nearly nine years.
As for the second part of the question: what contributions have you made to the community? This is even less relevant. How do we judge contributions? Is sitting on a board for ten years more or less of a contribution than having been a volunteer fire fighter for the same amount of time? Everyone makes some contribution to the community. I don’t think anyone could claim that they have made only positive contributions nor could anyone claim some one else has done nothing – life just doesn’t work that way. Personally I have done a lot of volunteer work, from being a PHC volunteer to providing free counselling for people who can’t afford to pay for it, to writing columns and articles for some 6 years (counting both newspapers) – most of these columns had to do with island issues or Islander’s perceptions, and other activities. So I guess I would have to say I have made more contributions than some and less than others.
2. What is your understanding of the “precautionary principle”, and how do you think it relates to the Trust mandate?
As defined in Island Trust documents: “The precautionary principle states that when an activity raises threats of harm to the natural environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically”.
And “The Island Trust's mandate is to preserve and protect the Trust area and it’s unique amenities and environment for the benefit of residents of the trust area and of the province generally”.
This would mean that if you have doubts about how any proposal would affect the island environment or community, either now or in the future you should err on the side of caution and say no. It would also put the burden of proof on the person or persons making the proposal (or by-law) that both the short-term effects and the long-term effects would either be of benefit (or at least neutral) to the maintaining of the Trust Mandate. In short it means “if you can’t establish it is ok; don’t do it”.
If this principle was applied to all projects and by-laws it would result in a much more thorough examination of both the short and long-term effects on the Community.
3. The Gulf Islands Alliance sought and paid for a legal opinion on the abridged question; Are Local Trust Committees, the Trust Council and/or the Executive Committee required to exercise their powers consistent with the Trust object? Briefly outline what the answer to that question was, your thoughts about the answer, and how that would impact your behaviour as a Trustee.
The letter sent by the Alliance directs the attention of the Islands Trust Governance Task Force to the Superior Court of Appeal decision on the MACMILLAN BLOEDEL LIMITED vs. THE GALIANO ISLAND TRUST COMMITTEE case. The alliance believes this to be “the seminal decision on interpreting the Islands Trust Act, and because it provides direction regarding the unique powers and responsibilities that the Object of the Islands Trust [s. 3 Islands Trust Act] places in the hands of the Local Trust Committees”.
The court found for the trust council on the basis that whether or not there had been reasons other than those given for the by-laws the reasons were within the mandate of the trust.
What the court decided is really just common sense – of course our actions and decisions are required to be in accordance with our mandate no matter at what level the decisions are made. The court also found that they should be very hesitant in getting involved in any decision made by a democratically elected body within its legal charter. If we were making decisions not in keeping with our mandate then why would we bother getting elected?
4. Why are you running for Trustee?
I am running for three basic reasons. One is that this community has been good to me in many ways and what I have to offer as an Island Trust council member would, I believe, be a good way to give back to the community.
The second has to do with a change in my personal outlook since I had the lung transplant. Before the transplant, I didn’t plan beyond next week, afterwards it slowly dawned on me that I now had the life expectancy to make long term commitments and that having the talents to make a difference, it was time to do.
Third, I have always been an ardent supporter and defender of the Trust. I haven’t always been pleased with its decisions or the quality of long term thinking that has gone into some of the decisions made. I felt that I could bring my abilities at analysis, long-term thinking, problem solving and win-win mindset to the Trust in such a way as to make decision making more accountable, more transparent and show how the decisions made reflected the Trust mandate.
1. How long have you been a full-time resident of Gabriola, and what contributions to the Gabriola community have you made?
I must admit this question took me by surprise, as how long someone has lived somewhere says absolutely nothing about their ability to represent the community. I have lived here for nearly nine years.
As for the second part of the question: what contributions have you made to the community? This is even less relevant. How do we judge contributions? Is sitting on a board for ten years more or less of a contribution than having been a volunteer fire fighter for the same amount of time? Everyone makes some contribution to the community. I don’t think anyone could claim that they have made only positive contributions nor could anyone claim some one else has done nothing – life just doesn’t work that way. Personally I have done a lot of volunteer work, from being a PHC volunteer to providing free counselling for people who can’t afford to pay for it, to writing columns and articles for some 6 years (counting both newspapers) – most of these columns had to do with island issues or Islander’s perceptions, and other activities. So I guess I would have to say I have made more contributions than some and less than others.
2. What is your understanding of the “precautionary principle”, and how do you think it relates to the Trust mandate?
As defined in Island Trust documents: “The precautionary principle states that when an activity raises threats of harm to the natural environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically”.
And “The Island Trust's mandate is to preserve and protect the Trust area and it’s unique amenities and environment for the benefit of residents of the trust area and of the province generally”.
This would mean that if you have doubts about how any proposal would affect the island environment or community, either now or in the future you should err on the side of caution and say no. It would also put the burden of proof on the person or persons making the proposal (or by-law) that both the short-term effects and the long-term effects would either be of benefit (or at least neutral) to the maintaining of the Trust Mandate. In short it means “if you can’t establish it is ok; don’t do it”.
If this principle was applied to all projects and by-laws it would result in a much more thorough examination of both the short and long-term effects on the Community.
3. The Gulf Islands Alliance sought and paid for a legal opinion on the abridged question; Are Local Trust Committees, the Trust Council and/or the Executive Committee required to exercise their powers consistent with the Trust object? Briefly outline what the answer to that question was, your thoughts about the answer, and how that would impact your behaviour as a Trustee.
The letter sent by the Alliance directs the attention of the Islands Trust Governance Task Force to the Superior Court of Appeal decision on the MACMILLAN BLOEDEL LIMITED vs. THE GALIANO ISLAND TRUST COMMITTEE case. The alliance believes this to be “the seminal decision on interpreting the Islands Trust Act, and because it provides direction regarding the unique powers and responsibilities that the Object of the Islands Trust [s. 3 Islands Trust Act] places in the hands of the Local Trust Committees”.
The court found for the trust council on the basis that whether or not there had been reasons other than those given for the by-laws the reasons were within the mandate of the trust.
What the court decided is really just common sense – of course our actions and decisions are required to be in accordance with our mandate no matter at what level the decisions are made. The court also found that they should be very hesitant in getting involved in any decision made by a democratically elected body within its legal charter. If we were making decisions not in keeping with our mandate then why would we bother getting elected?
4. Why are you running for Trustee?
I am running for three basic reasons. One is that this community has been good to me in many ways and what I have to offer as an Island Trust council member would, I believe, be a good way to give back to the community.
The second has to do with a change in my personal outlook since I had the lung transplant. Before the transplant, I didn’t plan beyond next week, afterwards it slowly dawned on me that I now had the life expectancy to make long term commitments and that having the talents to make a difference, it was time to do.
Third, I have always been an ardent supporter and defender of the Trust. I haven’t always been pleased with its decisions or the quality of long term thinking that has gone into some of the decisions made. I felt that I could bring my abilities at analysis, long-term thinking, problem solving and win-win mindset to the Trust in such a way as to make decision making more accountable, more transparent and show how the decisions made reflected the Trust mandate.
