01 | December | 2016 | Stephen Rees's blog

Archive for December 1st, 2016

Proportional Representation the only credible option for 2019

Press Release from Fair Vote Canada, December 1, 2016

Today, Canadians saw first-hand how proportional representation can work for all Citizens. The Special Committee on Electoral Reform – a multi-partisan group of MPs who were selected in proportion to the votes their parties received – submitted an evidence-based, majority report that called for a strong system of Proportional Representation.

The all-party committee on electoral reform has stated that they heard overwhelming support from experts and Canadians on their cross Canada tour. This reinforces the findings from decades of research from around the world and of 13 previous electoral reform processes in Canada, including two thorough and impartial citizens assemblies.

However, in a shocking and profoundly disappointing move, the Liberal members of the ERRE held a secondary press conference where they essentially recommended that the government break its own election promise. Oddly, the Chair of the Committee suggested that the point of making election promises is not so much to actually fulfill them, but to ENGAGE people. This is a mind-bending and dangerous spin on what it means to make electoral promises.

What needs to be stressed is that there was a consensus on what the committee heard: that 88% of experts that expressed an opinion on electoral reform suggested proportional representation – not AV (ranked ballots in single-member ridings), not First-past-the-post.

While the ERRE did not recommend a particular proportional system in the majority report, the NDP and Greens put forth two made-in-Canada PR options based on the evidence they heard and they are willing to work with the government on a design. The base exists for satisfying the government’s electoral promise in good time for 2019.

As Nathan Cullen declared: “rarely have such extensive consultations on a subject been carried out.” Unfortunately, the turnout and passion of Canadians did not impress MP Ruby Sahota who added that the Liberals needed to see a lot more engagement but would not commit to goals or outcomes.

We wonder what magic bar of engagement is necessary to fulfill their promise and how does that measures up against other election promises?

When the Government launched its electoral reform platform preceding the election, they announced they would end first-past-the-post voting and make every vote count. That means Proportional Representation. Trudeau and many in his party said they were changing the system based on feedback from Canadians that the system is unfair and does not accurately reflect what voters say at the polls.

The Government now has all the evidence it needs. Now is time for Liberals to show leadership, rise above partisan self interest and deliver on their promise, including introducing legislation within 18 months of the 2015 election to “Make Every Vote Count”, in time for the 2019 election.

Key indicators from ERRE hearings

88% of expert witnesses who expressed a preference called for proportional representation

4% supported the Alternative Vote (majoritarian ranked ballot systems tend to evolve towards a two-party system, often favour centrist parties and could further entrench the distortions brought about by our existing majoritarian system. )

67% thought a referendum was undesirable or unnecessary.

Detailed analysis can be found here in our Synthesis of witness statements and views.

Written by Stephen Rees

December 1, 2016 at 5:38 pm

Posted in electoral reform, politics

Tagged with Proportional Representation

Will shaky soils kill the bridge?

with one comment

Massey-Bridge-rendering

I am not an engineer or a geologist. But I do know that soil liquefaction is a huge problem for structures in earthquake prone areas, like the one we live in. When the shaking starts what seemed to be solid ground is actually waterlogged sands and similar material – the result of millennia of silt being deposited by the Fraser River as it slows on its way to the sea – starts to move. The damage to buildings in San Francisco in its famous quake was due to similar soil conditions. They still cause issues there: a high rise called Millennium has piles that do not reach bedrock and it is both sinking and leaning.

When the Massey crossing was first contemplated it was these soil conditions that caused the engineers to reject the idea of a bridge and chose a tunnel instead. Those conditions have not changed since. The Geological Survey of Canada in 1995 reported that bedrock is around 1,970 to 2,300 feet below where the new bridge is proposed. More recently B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure had two holes bored to 1,099 feet “without tagging bedrock” – not really a surprise since there was another 1,000 feet to go.

We know that Greater Vancouver is going to experience a major earthquake since there has not been a major shift in the tectonic plates since European settlement started, but there was apparently a “big one” which was recorded as a tsunami that hit Japan. These events are hard to predict with any accuracy but many seismologists think it is “overdue”. No-one has ever built a cable stayed bridge of this size in these kind of conditions. Indeed it is very hard to think of why anyone would propose taking such a risk – anyone who has the imagination to envisage what happens to two massive towers unsecured to bedrock but linked by cables and a bridge deck when the soil beneath them liquefies and shakes.

“I think people tend to focus on the Big One. If you’re looking at the statistics there’s a one in 10 chance that it will happen within the next 50 years. I think of those as fairly high odds. If we had a lottery with that kind of probability you’d probably buy a ticket,” she said.

The “she” quoted is Earthquake Canada seismologist Alison Bird

Ask yourself, as Premier Christy Clark wants you to buy a bridge, do you feel lucky?

Written by Stephen Rees

December 1, 2016 at 11:25 am

Posted in port expansion, Transportation

Tagged with cable stayed bridge, Delta, earthquakes, Fraser River, George Massey Tunnel, Richmond

Dire Straits

with 4 comments

The increase in shipping traffic if the TransMountain pipeline expansion is actually implemented poses a quite extraordinary threat to the Salish Sea. I heard on the CBC yesterday that the ships used to load at pipeline terminal in Burnaby are smaller than optimal, so they will be running a shuttle service to supertankers moored off the coast somewhere for transhipment. And do not forget that we are talking about diluted bitumen: this is a heavy mixture of tar and sand mixed with natural gas condensate to get it to flow. In the event of a spill, the lighter fractions quickly evaporates, and the bitumen sinks. That means it is for all intents and purposes irrecoverable. Indeed, I think, as campaigners against the pipeline, we need to take a lesson from Jordan Bateman and repeat “dilbit sinks” whenever anyone talks about what a great idea tar sands exports are.

The following is a letter that Susan Jones has sent to our politicians. She copied it to Fraser Voices and has given me permission to reproduce it here.

The Right Honourable Justin P. Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada

The Honourable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change

The Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

The Honourable Jim Carr, Minister of Natural Resources

The Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport

The Honourable Amarjeet Sohi, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities

Members of Parliament Ottawa, Canada, K1A 0E4

Have you any idea of what you have just approved with the Kinder Morgan pipeline in British Columbia?

Your statistics and statements of fact are not correct and should be referenced.

According to the website below:

“ More than 10,000 vessels transit the lower Strait of Georgia, Boundary Pass and Haro Strait each year. But that includes tugs, fishing boats, private yachts and ferry boats. There are about 3,000 large tankers, container ships and bulk carriers that pass the same way each year. Adding another 400 tankers would increase the total traffic to about ten ships a day, a bit less than one every hour, coming or going.”

http://www.tideflats.com/oil-tankers-in-haro-straight/

This is not 1% increase as stated by the federal Liberal Government. It is more than a 13% increase in large ships.

Also, you have not included other planned increases as outlined in the article referenced below. If all proceed, there will be a 40% increase in large vessels through the narrow shipping lane from Vancouver to the Pacific This is also the route traveled by the endangered Southern Resident Killer Whales (Orcas) which you are entrusted to protect.

http://www.islandtides.com/assets/reprint/oil_20140306.pdf

The information you have broadcast is not “evidence based” and it is not “safe” for the amazing environment of the Strait of Georgia, Boundary Pass, Haro Strait and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Just take a look at the maps below and see how narrow the shipping passes are from Vancouver to the Pacific. In addition, the passage from the Juan de Fuca Strait to the Pacific is dangerous and subject to strong winds, and powerful currents. The area, also known as the Big Eddy is rich in nutrients supporting entire food chains – from plankton to whales.

Take a look at the route below and think about the impact of even a minor accident or spill. Even without an accident, the noise impact of increased numbers of large ships interferes with whale communication leading to mortality. The impacts of increased numbers of large vessels cannot be effectively mitigated.