A commentary by a resident of Salt Spring Island.
The formation of the Islands Trust was a bold experiment in a unique form of governance. Now, almost 50 years later, it is time to examine the results of this experiment.
I call for an independent financial audit of the Trust, examining the efficiency and value for the money spent. In conjunction with the recently concluded Governance Study, this can guide the provincial government in an evidence-based rewrite of the Trust Act.
“A difference of opinion, surrounded by water.” These are the words the late Arthur Black used to describe Salt Spring Island.
When it comes to local governance this might have been said of any of the Gulf Islands. It is equally true of the governing body of the Islands Trust, the Trust Council, where there is no consensus on the meaning of the mandate “to preserve and protect.”
This, coupled with a lack of clearly defined and measurable objectives, creates confusion for our elected representatives, and for the population of the area.
A recent commentary by Frants Attorp caused me to reflect on what can be done to address the acrimony in our Gulf Island communities that has arisen from actions and directions of the Islands Trust, as it struggles to act in accordance with a poorly understood mandate.
Attorp offers his point of view, and tacitly in doing so, his understanding of the Trust mandate. He supports his assertions with a selected quote from the recent governance study of the Islands Trust. Others, can, and have, made the point that he has misconstrued, even misrepresented, the message of this study and presented a biased viewpoint, disguised as factual.
One notable consequence of the absence of agreement as to the meaning of the Islands Trust mandate along with the lack of clearly defined and measurable objectives, is that members of our communities too often find themselves at odds with neighbours over the costs and directions of the Islands Trust.
This is unhealthy, and particularly egregious in small and isolated communities where anonymity is next to non-existent.
To many, it appears that in the Gulf Islands, particularly as related to governance and the Islands Trust: “They that yell the loudest determine the outcome.”
These social ills exist despite an overwhelming majority of Islanders being in favour of the original reasons for the formation of the Trust and its future.
My sense is that after close to 50 years of what is frequently cited as a new and unique form of government, it is high time that evidence, and neither personal nor political bias, determine the future course of this unique form of governance.
The independent governance study was recently carried out and the results are in. Now it is time for an independent financial audit of the Trust. Taken together, the results of these, rather than the cries of particular interest groups, should form the basis for a rewrite of the Trust Act in accordance with the evidence.
This is especially germane given that this is a new and unique form of governance. I have seen it referred to as “an experiment.”
As with any experiment, it is incumbent on us to objectively monitor the outcome. It is high time to pose the question: “Are its objectives being met?” and to see if these objectives need redefining now almost 50 years into the experiment.
Finding the answers to these questions should be of interest to all parties: citizens of the Gulf Islands, of B.C. in general, and especially to the Islands Trust itself, who presumably must want to know if they are making the best use of the available resources and doing so in a financially responsible manner.
The governance study is done, I call for an independent financial audit, and then a rewrite of the Act in line with the actual data.
