Tools To Build A Future
A Vision For
Constructive Dialogue
July 1998
A Proposal By
Robert W. Jones
President
Of The Elphinstone Community Association
Vice-Chair Of The Sunshine Coast Transportation Commission
Member Of The Howe Sound / Sunshine Coast Ferry Advisory Committee
Member Of BC Ferries Cost Allocation And Finance Committee
Table of Contents
1. Management Summary - Abstract
3.2.3. Howe Sound / Sunshine Coast Ferry Advisory Committee
4. Experience To Date of Our Committee
4.1.2. Phase 1 Costing By BC Ferries
4.2.2. Operations & Scheduling
4.3. Public Perception Of And Reactions To Ferry Advisory
4.3.2. Best Reasons For Not Getting Involved
4.3.3. Best Reasons For Getting Involved
4.4. Process Pros And Cons Of The Processes To Date
5.1. Cost Allocation & Finance
5.2.1. “We Want To Achieve Efficiencies Before We Raise Fares”
Tom Ward
5.3.4. BC Ferries Board Of Directors
6.1. BC Ferries Corp. Is Not Responsible For All B.C. Ferries
6.2. Cabinet ignores the Stakeholders
6.2.1. Invitation not responded to
6.3. Cabinet Ignores B.C. Ferries
6.4.2. Did not fairly document the arguments put forward
6.5. BC Ferries Fires Sunshine Coast Representatives
7.2. Potential to be high jacked by special interest groups
8. Requirements For Resolution
8.3. Take The Politics Out Of BC Ferries
8.4. Provide a Structure for the stake holder process
8.5. The Possible Structure Alternatives
8.5.1. Transport And Communications BC
9. Transport & Communications BC
9.1. Responsible For The Movement Of People, Goods, And
Information Within The Province Of BC.
9.5. Analyse The Transportation and Communication Needs of the
Province
10.5.5. Staff Information Requests
10.5.6. Intervener Information Requests
10.5.7. Alternate Dispute Resolution Process
11. BC Ferries Board of Director Commission
11.4. Conceptual Organisational Chart
11.5.5. Staff Information Requests
11.5.6. Intervener Information Requests
11.5.7. Alternate Dispute Resolution Process
I think just about every one would agree that the stakeholder process is a critical component to BC Ferries survival. At the moment the stakeholders process is in crisis and doomed to failure.
The focus of this document is structure. It essentially address the question “How do you structure the stake holder process, so that the process can:
· The Stakeholders learn the facts of the BC Ferries situation.
· Have easy access to all the players in the game
· Provide solutions from a Stakeholder prospective that will be heard by cabinet.
This document is proposes a number of significant alternatives as to the structuring of the process. These alternatives include:
· The Pentagon (Page 9)
· Transport & Communications BC (Page 9)
· Analyse The Transportation and Communication Needs of the Province
Error! Not a valid link.
· BC Ferries Commission (Page 9)
· BC Ferries Board of Director Commission (Page 9)
Once you have a structure that all sides have confidence in, then and only you can have meaningful dialogue, which has the potential of yielding solutions to problems, which all sides can live with.
This document was started in early 1998. Since that time a number of events have happened, but the underlying problems still remain.
About four years ago, as the story goes, BC Ferries was told that they were not listening to the Public. A consultation process was begun in an attempt to obtain the views of the public. The first committee was formed in the North. The second in the Southern Gulf Islands and the third encompassed the Howe Sound & Sunshine Coast Region. A number of other committees have been formed since. It is BC Ferries stated intention to have all routes represented by stakeholder committees.
The experience and value of each committee has varied. Some committees have enjoyed a very positive experience while others have not.
In our region, Howe Sound -
The purpose of this document is to evolve some of my ideas, and indeed the thoughts and ideas of others, into a proposal, which will take the current process into the next millennium.
2.1. Definitions
2.1.1. Fleets Vs Regions
My personal view has always been that if the AVP for the regions a Master Mariner, then those routes under him or her formed a fleet. If the AVP is a bureaucrat, these those routes under him or her formed a region. The intention was not to create division but rather recognise the diverse backgrounds, which make up BC Ferries management’s backgrounds. Thus Capt. Tom Whelan’s group of routes, I referred to as a Fleet, or more accurately Central Fleet.
3.1. What Is Ferry Advisory
There are as many ideas as to what Ferry Advisory is or should be as there are members of the public. What it is not can be summed up as follows:
It is not a board of directors
It is not a management committee
It has no power or authority
It does not exist in statute
It is not a legal entity
There is no remuneration or perks (other then the cost of travelling to and from meetings and accommodation.
What Ferry Advisory is can be summed up thus:
It is a group of individuals trying to balance the needs of the community with the reality of the corporation.
For each individual to do the job properly requires commitment to the process, dedication to the goal, diplomacy, and a tremendous amount of time and money.
The Goal is to restore a healthy viable BC Ferries which meets the needs of the people, the community, and the finally the government.
3.2. The Original Committees
3.2.1. Northern Committee
3.2.2.
South Gulf
Islands
3.2.3.
Howe Sound / Sunshine Coast
4.1. Strategic Planning
The first topic put forward for discussion by BC Ferries was to provide advice as to a ten-year strategic plan for the region.
4.1.1. Phase 1 Draft Proposal
A draft proposal was produced containing a series of proposals and recommendations. BC Ferries acted many of these on. Others were to be costed out by BC Ferries so as an informed choice could be made between options.
4.1.2. Phase 1 Costing By BC Ferries
BC Ferries returned to our committee with some ballpark costing on just about all we had asked for. Some items which had been misinterpreted along with those items which had been omitted were returned to BC Ferries.
4.1.3. Fast Passenger Only
The issue of Fast Passenger Only Service
from Langdale to
4.2. Subcommittees
In order to facilitate the functioning of The Howe Sound / Sunshine Coast Ferry Advisory Committee it was decided to form several sub committees, all of which were to report to the main committee.
4.2.1. Communications
A communications subcommittee was formed to communicate the work of the committee to the community. This committee met only once, where it was decided that BC Ferries would handle all such communications.
4.2.2. Operations & Scheduling
The issue of BC Ferries proposal to start charging for parking at Langdale Terminal created the need for an operations and scheduling committee. It’s work eventually expanded to include a variety of subjects.
4.3. Public Perception Of And Reactions To Ferry Advisory
I believe that in order to understand what happened to Ferry Advisory in our area, you must view the process through the eyes of the public.
4.3.1. What Is Ferry Advisory
There are as many ideas as to what Ferry Advisory is or should be as there are members of the public. What it is not can be summed up as follows:
It is not a board of directors
It is not a management committee
It has no power or authority
It does not exist in statute
It is not a legal entity
There is no remuneration or perks (other then the cost of travelling to and from meetings and accommodation.
What Ferry Advisory is can be summed up thus:
It is a group of individuals trying to balance the needs of the community with the reality of the corporation.
For each individual to do the job properly requires commitment to the process, dedication to the goal, diplomacy, and a tremendous amount of time and money.
The Goal is to restore a healthy viable BC Ferries which meets the needs of the people, the community, and the finally the government.
4.3.2. Best Reasons For Not Getting Involved
Through out the duration of our committee there were a number of people who I personally approached who distinct opinions about BC Ferries, which would be helpful to the work of the committee but refused to get involved for a variety of reasons but mostly falling into the following categories.
4.3.2.1. It’s a Farce and a shame
A major hurdle, which I believe that our committee had to overcome, was the public perception that the process was a farce and a shame. The public believed that BC Ferries had been doing it their way for 30 plus years - why should they change?
4.3.2.2. Let’s wait and see.
Another common comment that I heard was “Let’s wait and see what happens”, or “If it’s a success I’ll get involved.
4.3.2.3. I don’t have the time.
Another common comment, usually from people who like to complain a lot, but don’t want to do anything to effect resolution of the problem(s).
4.3.3. Best Reasons For Getting Involved
Once however, it became clear that things were happening, every one wanted to be a part of it.
4.3.3.1. Ops it’s working - I’ve got to be part of it.
4.4. Process Pros And Cons Of The Processes To Date
4.4.1. Cons
4.4.1.1. There is no commitment by the government that they will listen to, let alone act upon the advice of the process.
4.4.1.2. Ops, it’s working, we’ve got to control it.
4.4.1.3. To Much Control, to little involvement
4.4.1.4. No Continuity
4.4.1.5. No Commitment
4.4.2. Pros
4.4.2.1. Provide a common form where people can sit at the table and discuss issues in a civilised manner rather then protest and demonstrate.
4.4.3. Mistakes And Lessons
4.4.3.1. Letting BC Ferries staff do what we should have done
This extremely sensitive issue and should not be misinterpreted. It was the committees collective decision that BC Ferries staff should:
Chair the Committee
Act as committee secretary
While BC ferries staff did an admirable job in performing these tasks, it did however open the door to the charge that they were trying to manipulate the committee and the process. But manipulation is a two way street: you can only be manipulated if you allow it to happen. When you are part of any committee such as this, you have to have certain street smarts.
4.4.3.2. Divide and Conquer
4.4.3.3. Gagging other members
It became apparent to myself, as I am sure it did to a number of others, that there was a need for a fleet wide form. A number on our committee did not want to see this happen. When I first proposed we start communicating with other committees I was voted down.
Then VP of Finance, now Executive Vice President of Inter Island Services Glen Brown, initiated a process called Cost Allocation and Finance. It was expanded to include discussions with regard to tariffs in the fall of 1997.
5.1. Cost Allocation & Finance
The objective of this committee was to find a method of allocating cost and subsidies in an equitable manner cross the fleet. Traditional most costs and the subsidies were allocated to administration.
5.2. Tariff Consultation
5.2.1. “We Want To Achieve Efficiencies Before We Raise Fares” Tom Ward
5.3. The Pentagon
The concept of the BC Ferries Pentagon evolved from the principal that you could only have a conversation if all parties to the conversation are present.
5.3.1. The Customers
The customers or Stakeholders have always been part of the conversation.
5.3.2. BC Ferries Management
So has BC Ferries management.
5.3.3. BC Ferries Staff
BC Ferries staff represented by their union have not formally been a part of the process until very recently.
5.3.4. BC Ferries Board Of Directors
BC Ferries Board of Directors only
became involved in Nov. 1997 at our
5.3.5. The Government
The government has not officially been
involved at any time. Gordon Wilson, MLA
for
6.1. BC Ferries Corp. Is Not Responsible For All B.C. Ferries
6.2. Cabinet ignores the Stakeholders
6.2.1. Invitation not responded to
6.3. Cabinet Ignores B.C. Ferries
6.4. The John Fryer Report
6.4.1. Was not independent
6.4.2. Did not fairly document the arguments put forward
6.5.
BC Ferries Fires
Sunshine Coast
6.5.1. Divide and conquer
7.1. Lack of input
7.2. Potential to be high jacked by special interest groups
I believe that there are a number of fundamental requirements in order to move both the process, and BC Ferries forward into the next Millennium.
8.1. What is BC Ferries?
In order to proceed in any direction, you must first decide what BC Ferries. The Stakeholders believe that BC Ferries is the operator of, and maintenance contractor for, a Marine Highway System, which spans most of the Coastal Waters of BC.
8.2. How is it Funded
BC Ferries has essentially four sources of Revenues:
Fare Box Revenues
Federal Contract
Provincial Subsidy
Other Revenues and Contracts
8.3. Take The Politics Out Of BC Ferries
Firstly we have to take the politics out of BC Ferries. If BC Ferries truly is a Corporation, then it must be given the freedom to act as one.
You can divide these into three types of input: regulatory, Stakeholder and Government Agencies and Ministries.
8.4. Provide a Structure for the stake holder process
8.5. The Possible Structure Alternatives
8.5.1. Transport And Communications BC
8.5.2. BC Ferries Commission
9.1.
Responsible For The Movement Of
People, Goods, And Information Within The Province Of BC
9.2. People
9.3. Goods
9.4. Communications
9.5. Analyse The Transportation and Communication Needs of the Province
10.1.Introduction
10.2.Scope
10.3.Independence
10.4.Structure
10.5.Process Overview
10.5.1.Applicant
10.5.2.The Application
Typically the process would be initiated by an application from BC Ferries Corp., however the commission itself, or an intervener could also initiate such a request.
10.5.2.1.An Application by the commission
10.5.2.2.An application by BC Ferries Corporation
A typical process cycle would be initiated by BC Ferries applying to the commission to add, change or delete a service, function, or tariff. Examples would include:
Changing a Schedule
Changing a tariff
Introducing a new service
Introducing a new type of service
Terminating an existing service
10.5.2.3.An Application by an Intervener
A process cycle could also be initiated from outside BC Ferries. Examples if this type of application would include:
Requests for new service
Modifications to an existing service
Imposing new criteria or modifying an existing one
Changing the commission process or structure
10.5.3.Notice Of Application
10.5.4.Interveners
A major problem with any committee system is that there is always the potential for a committee to become dominated by one opinion to the exclusion of the minority or so called non-vocal majority opinion. The intervener format over comes this problem by putting each group or individual on a level playing field before the commission.
10.5.4.1.Application for status
Any individual, group or association, Company, government Body may apply for intervener status by writing a simple letter of application to the commission. The letter should include the applicants reasons for intervening, a mail address, and if a group, association, etc. the official contact person.
10.5.4.2.Test
The test as whether or not the application for status is granted by the commission shall be demonstrated relevance - does the application directly affect the applicant.
The commission should also have the latitude and power to include applicants who would not normally meet the test but whose participation would be a benefit to the proceeding.
10.5.4.3.List of Interveners
The commission shall maintain and publish the list of Interveners for each application
10.5.4.4.Funding
The BC Utilities Commission as does, I believe, all Federal Commissions, recognises the fact that not all Interveners are wealthy Individuals or Organisations able to bankroll their participation in the process. Yet to have all individuals and groups participate on a level playing field in not only desirable, it is essential for democracy to prevail!
The commission would issue a standard rate schedule, which would be updated from time to time against which Interveners may request funding. Based on the level and quality of the Interveners participation, the commission would award funding, at the conclusion of the process. The commission would be given the option to award partial funding in advance, or interim funding to those Interveners already known to the commission and have demonstrated just cause.
10.5.4.4.1.Vote Buying
The issue of BC Ferries or any one else buying votes should not have merit since the BC Ferries Commission would have it’s own budget and would be independent of both the Stakeholders, the Government, and the Corporation.
10.5.5.Staff Information Requests
10.5.6.Intervener Information Requests
10.5.7.Alternate Dispute Resolution Process
The Alternate Dispute Resolution Process of A.D.R. is a form similar to the committee process stakeholders now knows. The parties enter into a conference, which attempts to reach a compromise between the applicant, the commission, and the interested parties. Should resolution not be achieved, and then the A.D.R. is considered a privileged conversation. The matter proceeds to a full hearing as if the A.D.R. had not taken place.
10.5.8.Hearings
10.5.9.Decision
10.5.10.Appeal
11.1.Introduction
11.2.Scope
11.3.Independence
11.4.Conceptual Organisational Chart
11.5.Process Overview
11.5.1.Applicant
11.5.2.The Application
Typically the process would be initiated by an application from BC Ferries Corp., however the commission itself, or an intervener could also initiate such a request.
11.5.2.1.An Application by the commission
11.5.2.2.An application by BC Ferries Corporation
A typical process cycle would be initiated by BC Ferries applying to the commission to add, change or delete a service, function, or tariff. Examples would include:
Changing a Schedule
Changing a tariff
Introducing a new service
Introducing a new type of service
Terminating an existing service
11.5.2.3.An Application by an Intervener
A process cycle could also be initiated from outside BC Ferries. Examples if this type of application would include:
Requests for new service
Modifications to an existing service
Imposing new criteria or modifying an existing one
Changing the commission process or structure
11.5.3.Notice Of Application
11.5.4.Interveners
A major problem with any committee system is that there is always the potential for a committee to become dominated by one opinion to the exclusion of the minority or so called non-vocal majority opinion. The intervener format over comes this problem by putting each group or individual on a level playing field before the commission.
11.5.4.1.Application for status
Any individual, group or association, Company, government Body may apply for intervener status by writing a simple letter of application to the commission. The letter should include the applicants reasons for intervening, a mail address, and if a group, association, etc. the official contact person.
11.5.4.2.Test
The test as whether or not the application for status is granted by the commission shall be demonstrated relevance - does the application directly affect the applicant.
The commission should also have the latitude and power to include applicants who would not normally meet the test but whose participation would be a benefit to the proceeding.
11.5.4.3.List of Interveners
The commission shall maintain and publish the list of Interveners for each application
11.5.4.4.Funding
The BC Utilities Commission as does, I believe, all Federal Commissions, recognises the fact that not all Interveners are wealthy Individuals or Organisations able to bankroll their participation in the process. Yet to have all individuals and groups participate on a level playing field in not only desirable, it is essential for democracy to prevail!
The commission would issue a standard rate schedule, which would be updated from time to time against which Interveners may request funding. Based on the level and quality of the Interveners participation, the commission would award funding, at the conclusion of the process. The commission would be given the option to award partial funding in advance, or interim funding to those Interveners already known to the commission and have demonstrated just cause.
11.5.4.4.1.Vote Buying
The issue of BC Ferries or any one else buying votes should not have merit since the BC Ferries Commission would have it’s own budget and would be independent of both the Stakeholders, the Government, and the Corporation.
11.5.5.Staff Information Requests
11.5.6.Intervener Information Requests
11.5.7.Alternate Dispute Resolution Process
The Alternate Dispute Resolution Process of A.D.R. is a form similar to the committee process stakeholders now knows. The parties enter into a conference, which attempts to reach a compromise between the applicant, the commission, and the interested parties. Should resolution not be achieved, and then the A.D.R. is considered a privileged conversation. The matter proceeds to a full hearing as if the A.D.R. had not taken place.
11.5.8.Hearings
11.5.9.Decision
11.5.10.Appeal
Having a viable Stakeholders process is
of paramount importance. It eliminates
the need for protests, demonstration, and angry letters to the Minister. Our process has been essentially shut down
since Dec. 97. The newspaper headlines
on