From my Business in Vancouver column: It’s time for Christy Clark to do what former premier Gordon Campbell did when he needed someone to stickhandle the 2010 Olympic Games bid: recruit a respected apolitical leader
.
Where is the next Jack Poole now that we need him again?
Metro Vancouver faces an historic turning point with the success or failure of the transit referendum. But so far we lack the leadership to get us to yes.
It’s time for Christy Clark to do what former premier Gordon Campbell did when he needed someone to stickhandle the 2010 Olympic Games bid: recruit a respected apolitical leader who can bring together diverse voices – and do the trade-offs, figure out what we need, what we can afford and come back with a plan.
It’s worked in other places. Here are two.
In Toronto, where political gridlock had resulted in stalemate, Anne Golden led a panel in fall 2013 to find a viable transit investment strategy for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area. Despite the challenge and tight time frame, 13 individuals representing all major stakeholders from across the political spectrum came to agreement in 12 weeks.
The plan is simple: a few revenue tools to create a reliable revenue stream. That also levers the debt that unlocks the billions of dollars needed to build the highest-priority projects within a decade – “a fair and balanced contribution from all stakeholders, without asking too much of any one group.”
Another city facing a similar challenge was, appropriately, very similar to us: Auckland, New Zealand.
In July 2012, Auckland council brought together the independent Consensus Building Group to forge a broad consensus around the funding sources needed to improve its transport system.
It took nine months to test alternatives and develop a shared understanding about Auckland’s transport funding needs and to consider more than 20 different funding approaches.
In the end, they narrowed it down to two questions they tested with the public:
Do you agree that:
(a) Securing additional funding for transport improvements in Auckland is a priority?
(b) A package of funding sources should be used to raise the additional $400 million per year required to meet the transport funding gap?
We have set out two packages of funding sources from 2021. Which do you prefer:
Option 1: Increased revenue primarily from rates (property taxes) and fuel taxes; or
Option 2: Road pricing supplemented by rates and fuel taxes.
There, perhaps, is the question for us, too. But this was for a public engagement process, not a referendum – showing that it is possible to gauge public opinion without abrogating the legislative responsibilities of our elected representatives.
For therein lies a danger, as Anne Golden warned:
I can tell you that developing a viable sustainable funding strategy for a multibillion-dollar region-wide transit plan cannot be easily translated into a single, simple referendum question. … Democratic theory is founded on representative democracy with elected officials representing a group of people; their role was not just to communicate the public’s wishes, but to use their own judgment, even when their views don’t align with the majority.
She fully understands the need to engage the public:
Champions are needed now who will communicate the importance of investing in region-wide networks and who appreciate the value of regional governance in this new era of city-regions. … In today’s world, this means engaging people continuously using all of the available channels and with support from all sectors, including business. There is no shortcut.
But who will be our champion now? Who will be the next generation’s Jack Poole? •
You assume she wants a positive outcome. There’s no indication of that. This has been discussed for months now…and there’s nothing to show for it.
Very nice piece Gord: simple message, to the right readership.
Don, I agree, but I’m inclined to side with those who think the R was a throw-away remark that’s blown up, and hence the best way to win CC round is offering the benefit of the doubt. “Of course CC wants the referendum to result in more funding for more transit, because the alternative would be economic stagnation too painful to imagine, wouldn’t it Christy?”
When politicians create bad policies the question always gets asked: “stupidity or malevolence?”
I think generally it’s just stupidity.
I doubt Christy is consciously trying to create a crisis. She’s just a politician who has inadvertently created a mess of an issue she doesn’t give a damn about. It started with some off the cuff remark and is continuing with her stubborn fat-headedness and the perception that drivers are her base. No one is driving the car, and it happens to be veering towards a ditch on this issue.
I just keep wondering why the MLAs for Kelowna (Clark) and Kamloops (Stone) would give a fig for improving transit in Metro Vancouver, as they similarly care so little for the social and economic survival of Gulf Island and coastal communities with skyrocketing ferry fares and cuts in ferry service.
There is no triple bottom line analysis in any of these concerns at the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.
A big name mainstream champion would be really helpful. And we probably need a grassroots coalition too, something like http://www.getonboardbc.ca
Sadly once the word “TransLink” is mentioned any champion gets cut off at the knees. An organization that’s widely respected outside BC, TransLink is dismissed here as incompetent and infinitely greedy. When real stories like the enormous Golden Ears subsidy won’t do, opponents are quick to invent scandals (South Surrey Park and Ride) to keep up a steady stream of anti-TransLink rhetoric. If our champion is to swim against such a strong tide of negativity he or she will need the strength of a powerlifter, the flexibility of a gymnast, the endurance of an ironman triathlete and the charisma of a Princess Diana or 1968 Pierre Trudeau.
I hate to be so negative, but I’m not convinced the combined forces of Tamara Taggart, Trevor Linden, Peter Ladner, Dianne Watts and Jimmy Pattison could pull it off, but I’d love to see that kind of broad based coalition give it a shot.
Tempting as it is to throw up one’s hands in the face of such persistent government bumbling (intentional or not), we can’t afford to screw this up. Adopting this proposition should be a no brainer for the government.