[SpongeG]

Corporatization of Translink continues with Falcon's Five
But Minister issues no press release on new screening panel dominated by
Howe Street

BURNABY, BC, Aug. 22 /CNW/ - BC Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon has
appointed a screening panel to hand pick who gets nominated for the new
Translink board - but he's hushing up the announcement to circumvent the
democratic process and avoid scrutiny for the panel's overwhelming business
bias, says the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

"Translink was advised of the appointments late last week, but the
Ministry of Transportation issued no press release," notes CUPE BC president
Barry O'Neill, commenting on an advisory to Translink directors and
municipalities.

"Given that Bill 36, the legislative overhaul of Translink, hasn't even
passed through final reading in the legislature, it's outrageous that Minister
Falcon would try to keep this announcement under the radar. British Columbians deserve to know how local government autonomy and accountability are being
brushed aside for the sake of the Campbell Liberals' corporate business
agenda."

The five men appointed to the panel are Vancouver Board of Trade governor Graham Clarke, Vancouver Board of Trade economist emeritus Dave Park, Greater Vancouver Gateway Council managing director Bob Wilds, FMG Financial Mentors Group president Hugh Lindsay and former BC premier Mike Harcourt.

All except Harcourt - the former provincial New Democratic Party leader
known for his interest in environmental and urban sustainability issues - are
strongly identified with the Vancouver Board of Trade and business interests.

"It's important to remember that the Translink board has the authority to
recommend tax increases, and to make decisions about capital investments,
operating systems and services in the region," says O'Neill.

"This is why we have elected officials. But Bill 36 would prevent
democratically elected mayors or councillors from serving on the Translink
board. And this screening panel, which is not even a legal entity, has the
authority to recommend board members before Bill 36 has even gone through the legislature. How does that serve democracy?"

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/August2007/22/c9359.html

[Bert]

Another Falcon moment... this guy is ridiculous. :yuck:

He was on CBC radio a week ago or so, and spent the whole interview lambasting Mayor Derek Corrigan for, essentially, not agreeing with him on Gateway. They played the feedback calls the next day - all 4 they played were angry at Falcon, his immaturity, and his dictating abuse of power.

Can't wait for him to get the boot.

[fever]

It's not really corporatization, is it? It's just taking control of Translink from an elected regional board and handing it to provincial appointees. It does seem premature (the changes haven't gone through the legislature). Anyway, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that all the appointees support Gateway and that's at least partially why they're there.

[hollywoodnorth]

GO Falcon GO!!!!

[Stingray2004]

Anyway, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that all the appointees support Gateway and that's at least partially why they're there.

Likely, including former moderate NDP premier Mike Harcourt who also has apparently come to the conclusion that our growing region is not sustainable with 50 year-old transportation infrastructure...

Interesting to note though, that Harcourt was also instrumental in the City of Vancouver during the anti-freeway debates of the late '60's, which would have seen the destruction of the Strathcona neighbourhood at the time.

I would have to agree with him on both positions!

Oh, by the way, the CNW press release was from CUPE... some people say they might have credibility... most people say they don't! ;)

[mr.x]

is it just me or do you also find this picture scary?
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/photo_gallery/images/2006/2006-05-29-1.jpg

[Bert]

I like the "bike and clothing provided by..." caption. From what we know, the guy just SUVs it back-and-forth across the Port Mann every day. I wonder if he even has a bike.

[CrooklynDodger]

Only two parties both filled with idiots. We need that STV now!

[Tom Bombadil]

Only two parties both filled with idiots.

Sounds like the U.S.

[officedweller]

Remember that the screening panel only recommends at least 15 qualified nominees for the Board of Directors. The Council of Mayors then elects 9 of those nominees to the Board of Directors.
This prevents joe blow politician from blocking a vote as a director because his constituents don't want transit-oriented density near their neighbourhood.

The amendments to the act establish long term plans.

Here's the legislation amending the GVTA Act - albeit only the first reading bill:

http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th3rd/1st_read/gov36-1.htm

Note that "eligible inidviduals" refers only to the appointees to the screening panel (no politicians to nominate their own political party's candidates). The panel's nominees for the board are "qualified individuals" who are subject to the conflict of interest guidelines.



"eligible individual" means an individual who

(a) is not an employee, director or officer of the authority or of any of its subsidiaries,

(b) is not, and has never been, a commissioner or a deputy commissioner,

(c) does not hold elected public office of any type, and

(d) is not an employee of the government or of a municipality, regional district, trust council or greater board;

Screening panel

172 (1) On or before June 30 of each year,

(a) the minister must appoint one eligible individual,

(b) the mayors' council on regional transportation must appoint one eligible individual,

(c) the council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia must appoint one eligible individual,

(d) the board of directors of the Vancouver Board of Trade must appoint one eligible individual, and

(e) the Greater Vancouver Gateway Society must appoint one eligible individual,

and the persons appointed under this subsection constitute a screening panel for the year in which the appointments are made.

Role of first screening panel

176 (1) The screening panel appointed in 2007 must, on or before September 15, 2007, provide to the mayors' council on regional transportation a list of at least 15 qualified individuals to be considered for appointment as directors of the authority.

(2) Promptly after performing its duties under subsection (1), and, in any event, on or before September 15, 2007, the screening panel appointed in 2007 must,

(a) by order, establish the remuneration to which a director of the authority is entitled and the terms on which it is to be paid, and

(b) provide to the authority all of the screening panel's records.

(3) The minister may extend the date referred to in subsection (1) or (2) if requested to do so by the screening panel.

(4) After the screening panel appointed in 2007 has performed its duties under subsections (1) and (2), the appointments of the members of the screening panel are terminated and the screening panel is disestablished.

Mayors' council on regional transportation to appoint first 9 directors

177 (1) The mayors' council on regional transportation must, within 45 days after receiving from the screening panel appointed in 2007 the list referred to in section 176 (1), appoint as directors of the authority 9 of the 15 nominees named in that list as follows:

(a) three nominees to sit as directors of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2008;

(b) three nominees to sit as directors of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2009;

(c) three nominees to sit as directors of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2010.

(2) For the purpose of making appointments under this section, each member of the mayors' council on regional transportation has one vote.

(3) Subject to section 178 (1), if the mayors' council on regional transportation appoints nominees referred to in subsection (1) of this section as directors of the authority, those appointees take office as directors of the authority for the terms provided for them in those appointments.

(4) If, despite subsection (1), the mayors' council on regional transportation appoints none or fewer than 3 of the nominees as directors of the authority within the time required, the nominees named in the list referred to in section 176 (1) are appointed as directors of the authority as follows:

(a) if, within the time required under subsection (1) of this section, the mayors' council on regional transportation appoints as directors of the authority 2 of the nominees named in the list referred to in section 176 (1), the first nominee on that list who is not a nominee appointed by the mayors' council on regional transportation is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2008;

(b) if, within the time required under subsection (1) of this section, the mayors' council on regional transportation appoints as a director of the authority one of the nominees named in the list referred to in section 176 (1),

(i) the first nominee on that list who is not a nominee appointed by the mayors' council on regional transportation is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2009, and

(ii) the 2nd nominee on that list who is not a nominee appointed by the mayors' council on regional transportation is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2008;

(c) if, within the time required under subsection (1) of this section, the mayors' council on regional transportation does not appoint as directors of the authority any of the nominees named in the list referred to in section 176 (1),

(i) the first nominee on that list is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2010,

(ii) the 2nd nominee on that list is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2009, and

(iii) the 3rd nominee on that list is deemed to be appointed as a director of the authority for a term expiring at the end of the day on December 31, 2008.

Considerations of screening panel

180 (1) In selecting the individuals to be nominated under section 176 (1) or 179 (1), the screening panel must,

(a) in 2007, nominate individuals who the screening panel determines are qualified individuals who hold the skills and experience needed to oversee the operation of the authority in an efficient and cost effective manner, and

(b) in subsequent years, after considering the skills and experience profile set out in the articles of the authority, nominate individuals who the screening panel determines are qualified individuals who hold the skills and experience needed to oversee the operation of the authority in an efficient and cost effective manner.

(2) When making an order under section 176 (2) (a) or 181 (1) (a), the screening panel must take into consideration the remuneration that is appropriate given the services provided by the directors to the authority and the time and attention the directors are required to devote for that purpose.

Conflicts of interest for directors

183 (1) Subject to subsection (6), a director of the authority who, in any way, directly or indirectly, has

(a) a significant beneficial interest in a share, stock, bond, debenture or other security of a person who

(i) owns or manages the operation of one or more commercial passenger vehicles or directly or indirectly has a significant beneficial interest in a person who owns or manages the operation of one or more commercial passenger vehicles,

(ii) provides, or directly or indirectly has a significant beneficial interest in a person who provides, independent transit services, or

(iii) provides parking services in the transportation service region or directly or indirectly has a significant beneficial interest in a person who provides parking services in the transportation service region,

(b) a significant beneficial interest in a device, appliance, machine, article, patent or patented process, or a part of it, that is material to the provision of transportation services in the transportation service region, or

(c) a significant beneficial interest in

(i) a contract for the provision of transportation services, including, without limitation, independent transit services, in the transportation service region, or

(ii) any contract, other than an indemnity referred to in section 189 or a contract of insurance referred to in section 189, to which the authority or a subsidiary is a party,

must disclose the nature and extent of the interest.

(2) The disclosure required of a director of the authority under subsection (1) must be made

(a) promptly after he or she becomes aware that he or she has an interest under subsection (1), and

(b) by a record

(i) the original of which is deposited in the authority's head office, and

(ii) a copy of which is provided to each of the other directors.

(3) A director of the authority who has an interest described in subsection (1) must,

(a) if the director has an interest described in subsection (1) (a) or (c) (i),

(i) immediately after becoming aware of that fact, refrain, until he or she has complied with subparagraph (ii) (A) of this paragraph, from

(A) exercising any of his or her powers or duties under this Act, including, without limitation, participating in or voting at any meeting of the directors of the authority or of a committee of the directors of the authority,

(B) communicating to any of the other directors of the authority in relation to the matter in relation to which the interest exists, and

(C) influencing in any way a decision or action to be made by the authority in relation to the matter in relation to which the interest exists, and

(ii) promptly after becoming aware of that fact,

(A) eliminate the circumstances that resulted in him or her having that interest, or

(B) resign as director of the authority, or

(b) if the director has an interest described in subsection (1) (b) or (c) (ii), immediately after becoming aware of that fact, refrain from

(i) participating in or voting at any meeting of the directors of the authority or of a committee of the directors of the authority in relation to the matter in relation to which the interest exists,

(ii) communicating to any of the other directors of the authority in relation to the matter in relation to which the interest exists, and

(iii) influencing in any way a decision or action to be made by the authority in relation to the matter in relation to which the interest exists.

(4) If a director of the authority has an interest described in subsection (1) (a) or (c) (i) and does not comply with subsection (3) (a) (ii) within 3 months after becoming aware of having that interest, the other directors of the authority must remove that director from office.

(5) The use or purchase in the transportation service region by a director of the authority, for personal or domestic purposes, of parking services or a means of conveyance is not a contravention of this section and does not disqualify the director from acting under this Act.

(6) A director of the authority who has a beneficial interest in a publicly held mutual fund or pension fund that contains any of the investments referred to in subsection (1) (a) is not, merely because of that interest,

(a) required to disclose that interest under subsection (1), and

(b) subject to subsection (3) or (4),

unless those investments make up more than 30% of the total mutual fund or pension fund holdings.

(7) Without limiting any provision of this section and despite section 2 (2), section 124 (1) and (2) of the Business Corporations Act applies to the authority.

[squeezied]

I like the "bike and clothing provided by..." caption. From what we know, the guy just SUVs it back-and-forth across the Port Mann every day. I wonder if he even has a bike.

hahaha so true