Question #1 ‘Indigenous Title “Template”’
Background: From ‘indiginews’ April 18th 2024
“After decades of negotiation, the Council of the Haida Nation signed an agreement with “British Columbia” on Sunday transferring ownership and jurisdiction over its territory back from the Crown. … The Haida title agreement is ‘a template’ for what’s possible, says premier ..”
Please comment on how you see this event being replicated throughout BC .
[https://indiginews.com/features/landmark-haida-title-agreement-is-a-template-for-whats-possible-says-premier]
Lynne Block:
| Our leader and platform is clear that DRIPA and Land Titles Act will be rescinded. The Conservative Party of B.C. is interested in continuing all the good work of reconciliation through acts of economic endeavour and meaningful respectful partnerships. |
Sara Eftekhar:
| No response received |
Archie Kaario:
| As a lawyer with over 40 years experience I can say that whenever a settlement can be reached that is innovative and leaves both sides comfortable with the results that is always preferable to having a court decision provide a conclusion to a complex issue. Courts are not equipped to address complex and nuanced situations of the kind that engages two differently based cultures in sorting out competing interests. That said collaborative resolution with the government and a first nation working on resolving matters in a way that the Haida have arranged with the BC government is a positive template for resolving Indigenous BC government conflicts. Over time this approach ought to save time and money because litigation is both slow and expensive. It is important to resolve matters sooner rather than later as comprehensively as possible. This provides everyone guidelines for development and investment be it for nature preserves or residential and commercial initiatives . There is no meaningful way to put a cost on using the Heida approach for settlement of disputes province wide however it ought to cost less than litigation and take less time. As it should take less time that too ought to provide a cost savings. |
Karin Kirkpatrick:
| I support Indigenous economic and cultural reconciliation and measures that facilitate private-sector collaboration with Indigenous nations and Indigenous-owned businesses. In working with Nations and Indigenous communities, we should be identifying ways to drive forward economic opportunity and greater self-sufficiency while ensuring legislation properly reflects those goals without unintended consequences. It’s important that any processes or changes to legislation involve consultation with all relevant stakeholders and are handled in a clear, transparent manner. |
Question #2 Housing / Zoning: – Bill 44
Background: From the Vancouver Sun – June 4th 2024 :-
“If communities don’t meet the targets within six months, the province will appoint an independent adviser to help them make progress. If that doesn’t work, the province will wield a bigger stick and overrule the municipality with the power to rezone entire neighbourhoods to create more density.”
Please comment on how you see this policy being implemented in West Vancouver.
[https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-government-documents-reveal-all-47-municipalities-on-housing-naughty-list]
Lynne Block:
Bill 44 is an abhorrent over reach of the provincial government. The Bill does not take into consideration the careful planning and sensitive considerations necessary in many municipalities to maintain their unique character or quality of life. It does not consider all the infrastructure necessary to support such thoughtless growth. The Conservatives will rescind Bill 44 and look for ways to support and incentivize densification through funding infrastructure and working with municipalities to improve process.
Sara Eftekhar:
| No response received |
Archie Kaario:
| On Bill 44 hopefully West Vancouver can work effectively with the provincially appointed “independent advisor” so that imposition of the housing agenda by the government can be avoided. Given municipalities receive their very existence from laws created by the provincial government there may be little recourse but to comply. A carefully crafted court challenge may bring about results to West Vancouver’s satisfaction but that would be a slow and expensive process with little predictability in the outcome. In working with the advisor it would be important to ascertain her or his minimum expectations and seek to meet those and no more. Each community has unique features about them. West Vancouver being strung out along a rugged and beautiful coastline does not easily lend itself to densification above the highway or west of Dundarive. Those areas that can handle densification are in large measure already developed. With the rugged terrain of West Vancouver having some unique problems in addressing the infrastructure enhancement that densification requires the government must be less assertive with its objectives than it would be in a municipality such as Surrey or Langley. |
Karin Kirkpatrick:
| The NDP’s proposal to mandate new housing units without any new funds for infrastructure, transportation, healthcare, and schools is the result of a deeply flawed thought process. The legislation does not respect the uniqueness of each community and does not respect the democratic rights of municipal governments. We need to make sure there is adequate housing stock on the North Shore, both to ensure younger generations are able to buy a home here, as well as to address our labour shortage, ensuring small businesses are able to attract staff. As an MLA, and Opposition Shadow Critic for Housing, I proposed several amendments to Bill 44 including measures to allow municipalities with their own housing plans to opt-out and to exempt areas that don’t have sufficient infrastructure to support new housing. |
Question #3 ‘Transportation
Last week Global News reported “… two North Shore mayors reiterated the warning that massive transit cuts are coming in 2026 without a long-term fix to TransLink’s structural deficit.
Buchanan said such cuts would have “catastrophic consequences,” including the elimination of numerous bus routes and a projected increase in traffic congestion of 20 per cent. “
Please comment on what practical (and achievable) steps could be taken to address the worsening transportation situation on the North Shore …
Lynne Block:
| Traffic and congestion have been on everyone’s mind for a decade or more. About 7 years ago, a plan to bring light rail to North Shore, connecting to Vancouver area Skytrain and Metrotown was presented to all senior government and major employees on the North Shore. In all this time, with the NDP in government, with two MLA’s on the North Shore and one Minister, the best they could do is offer Bus Rapid Transit with no improvements to bridge crossings. Rail to the North Shore did not make it to Translinks 2030 priorities so it will not be attainable for another 20 years. The larger underlying factor is the amount of immigration the NDP are allowing the feds to filter into our province and already strained metro communities. If we must take in all this immigration we need to look at the province as a whole and develop roads and industry (high paying jobs) around the province and take the pressure off of metro. |
Sara Eftekhar:
| No response received |
Archie Kaario:
| Public transit along with alternate mobility modes such as bikes and scooters are the only way to reduce traffic congestion on the North Shore. Finding funds to pay for the transit ought to some extent come from those that use private vehicles to get around. A vehicle liciencing tax based on the vehicle weight and energy efficiency ought to be implemented on a province wide basis where the primary location of the vehicle being an indicator of what the fee would be. A rancher in the Cariboo would have a very low licence fee given the provincial bus line service there would be on the lower end of the expense. A resident of the North Shore would have a high fee sufficient to cover a substantial shortfall in funding from riders etc. Two other features to consider is to work toward free transit which is part of the Green Party planform with gradual implementation providing free transport for youth under 16 and seniors over 65. This would gradually lead to all transit being free with the cost being covered by vehicle licensing fees and carbon taxes. After several years of transit being free there ought to be a decrease in private vehicle use i.e. less traffic. Keep in mind that the carbon taxes and licensing fees of private vehicles are intended to be disincentives for driving private cars as well as a funding source for transit. Note that in Luxembourg transit is free and in Budapest seniors do not pay to ride transit. It is quite clear that just building more roads is not the answer as that just leads to more private vehicle use. There is a cost to the preceding proposal but that ought to be met by the two funding sources referenced. |
Karin Kirkpatrick:
| The North Shore has the most substantial traffic challenges in the Lower Mainland. North and West Vancouver have not received their fair share of infrastructure dollars, particularly regarding transportation infrastructure funding. I will push for the replacement of the Second Narrows Bridge, which will include significantly increased capacity to allow dedicated bus and HOV lanes and a Skytrain line to the North Shore. The North Shore has the most substantial traffic challenges in the Lower Mainland. North and West Vancouver have not received their fair share of infrastructure dollars, particularly regarding transportation infrastructure funding. I will push for the replacement of the Second Narrows Bridge, which will include significantly increased capacity to allow dedicated bus and HOV lanes and a Skytrain line to the North Shore. We need increased transit frequency between Park Royal and Phibbs Exchange to get us moving across the North Shore – and add direct bus service back to Capilano University so students don’t need to drive. |