Even frozen, MLA salaries are still plump
Do tell us more about how much B.C. MLAs really make after agreeing unanimously to a wage freeze for 2023.
The wages for an MLA may be $115,045 — the third highest in Canada — but that’s the base pay. There is additional compensation for other responsibilities which plump up the wages.
There are 23 ministers in the cabinet — one of the largest in the history of the province – who receive a salary bonus of 50 per cent, or $57,522. There are also four ministers of state who get a bonus of $40,266.
Another 20 members receive top-ups of anywhere from 10 to 90 per cent, from the premier to the deputy chair of a standing committee to the leader of the opposition. Of note, there are also 14 parliamentary secretaries that get a top-up of 15 per cent.
MLA salaries and these additional top-ups — benefitting about two-thirds of the 87 members — do not account for generous pension and benefits. If the recent recommendations of the Electoral Boundaries Commission are accepted, we may have as many as six more MLAs.
Read all about it at www.leg.bc.ca/learn-about-us/accountability/mla-remuneration-and-expenses.
All that said, it’s laudable to see some wage restraint and leadership by MLAs. Our hope is this commendable action will serve as an example for municipal councils across the province when they deal with the current inflationary pressures this environment will inevitably create.
John Treleaven, chair
Grumpy Taxpayers of Greater Victoria
Place a limit on rental suites
Some time ago I was on the strata council of a highrise near downtown Victoria. Because of the history of the building, fully one-half of the units were rentals.
After a spate of spectacularly bad behaviour — stealing lobby furniture, smashing the glass front door, roommate kicked out and sleeping in the common room — I checked all the recent bylaw infractions and police calls and found that they all stemmed from rented suites.
The owners, many living far away, had others, including property management companies, select their tenants, and they did a poor job of it. Fortunately we had a property management company that dealt with the owners and insurance company.
Strata council members dealt with the police. I could not figure out any way to get landlords to be more responsible about selecting tenants and monitoring their units.
As another letter-writer pointed out, for small buildings, there is a real possibility that half or more of the units get rented, and having enough owners to be on the strata council will be a serious problem.
If the province is determined to continue with this ill-advised scheme, I suggest that there be a maximum on the rental allowance of 20 per cent of the units.
Pieta VanDyke
Saanichton
Shortcomings aside, the best solution
The recent letter “Do nothing, create nothing, then sell it” highlights the difficulties our form of government and cultural values have dealing with many matters. In this case it is the need to protect ecosystems and reduce climate chaos and harmful warming.
The imposition of laws and regulations is a tricky business, as many diverse cases affected cannot fit with justice or efficiency into rules designed in part with those qualities in mind in the pursuit of policies usually intended for the general good.
To rectify this problem, we can either conduct thorough analyses of each case, thus taking time, and money, and producing appeals to comparison and accusations of bias, or we can revert to the arbitration of the market. “Market failure“ is increasingly being perceived when trading creates more harm than good.
In the letter, it seems the complaint is in essence about income without effort. A loose analogy might be the good fortune of a child with rich parents. Another inequity, which we insufficiently try to correct.
Carbon credits combine regulation with market economics. They thus incorporate values from different sections of our economic, social, and political culture. Doing so they have shortcomings, different from either regulation or market free-for-all.
But some carefully chosen better ones can be used alongside the maximum emission limits needed to avoid the much larger absurdity: suicide from climate chaos caused by addiction to habit and convenience, and subservience to corporate priorities.
Glynne Evans
Saanich
No, we don’t need unlimited free power
Re: “Fusion-power breakthrough a milestone for clean energy,” Dec. 14.
The starting gun has gone off and the race to develop commercial fusion power is on.
Although proponents claim the clean-energy finish line is still a “few decades away,” scientists are hoping their fusion-powered horse will get there before the fossil-fuelled horses completely destroy the biosphere.
Unfortunately, even if scientists successfully produce sustainable clean energy, the last thing the biosphere and its inhabitants need is “nearly unlimited free power.”
The only reason mankind hasn’t already destroyed what’s left of the life-giving stuff every organism on the planet needs to survive is because existing energy supplies aren’t free and unlimited.
If commercial fusion energy becomes a reality, the real challenge and next milestone for humanity will be controlling biosphere-destroying human behaviour: no doubt a reality that is top of mind for folks interested in fusion-powered advancements in national defence.
Ken Dwernychuk
Esquimalt
We need to measure health-care efficiency
Re: “Trudeau says he’s not willing to delay health-care reform any longer,” Dec. 14.
More federal funding will help, but Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is right to say that he is not willing to give a blank cheque to provinces without defined performance expectations.
The health crisis in Canada is not only due to lack of funding; it is equally, if not more, to do with the management and planning of our health-care system.
It is ironic that despite almost $200 billion of tax dollars that we spend every year on health care, no provincial jurisdiction can tell us the quality of its health care. Even CIHI, the national institute and one of the prime sources of health information in Canada, with all its knowledge and content expertise, has never produced any measure that would allow the public and politicians to take the pulse of this $200-billion enterprise.
The present health crisis has drawn focus on the shortage of physicians, nurses and infrastructure. All these challenges and accessibility issues would have been apparent had we focused on the direction that health-care quality has been going for the past few decades.
Also, there does not seem to be much talk about management of demand for services; there are no apparent filters to see whether we are serving patients’ demand or their need. Even though health care is funded by tax dollars, eliminating health premiums sends the wrong signal that health care is “free” and discourages people to self-care and self-manage.
Like the OPEC crisis that gave rise to a number of energy-conservation initiatives, there were suggestions from health prevention and promotion advocates decades ago to bring in the so-called “health conservation’’ initiatives to blunt the impact of the health-care crisis that was foreseen at that time, and we are experiencing now. Then we have health bureaucracy that is so huge, rigid and intimidating that it stifles innovation and creativity. No wonder health care is in crisis.
Paramjit S. Rana
Victoria
Atwell, Helps honoured the wishes of voters
Re: “Amalgamation statement is not correct,” letter, Dec. 6.
A review of the municipal election results of 2014 confirms that the majority of the voters did in fact approve the question placed before them. However, a quick review of the ballots confirms they were not asked whether they supported amalgamation.
Instead, to paraphrase: voters were all asked some variation of a similar question, “to investigate the feasibility, costs and implications of amalgamating.” In doing so, residents of seven of eight municipalities strongly supported the need for an independent public review of municipal government.
View Royal did not give their residents the same choice.
In contrast to their colleagues in the 2018 election, only Saanich mayor Richard Atwell and Victoria mayor Lisa Helps respected the wishes of their residents and agreed to pose a second question to confirm again their support “to fund a Citizens Assembly to explore the costs, benefits, and disadvantages of the amalgamation between the District and the City.”
Unfortunately, the review was delayed by COVID, but will be underway in 2023.
James Anderson, chairperson
Amalgamation Yes
A difference between soccer and rugby
A recent letter to the editor suggested that soccer players must be accident-prone, given the number of them falling down in agony during the World Cup.
Nope. It’s part of the game.
The difference between soccer and rugby is that soccer consists of 90 minutes of pretending you’re hurt, while rugby is 80 minutes of pretending you’re not.
Ian Cameron
Brentwood Bay
Exhaust all options before suggesting MAID
There have now been four, possibly five, veterans advised by someone at Veterans’ Affairs to use medical assistance in dying (MAID) to resolve their issues. One veteran’s request was a wheelchair ramp.
When MAID was brought into law, there were few safeguards to protect those who were vulnerable. Other countries make it illegal to counsel someone to die. Not Canada.
Another protection is that every avenue for help should be exhausted before MAID is considered. Not Canada. In fact, Canada has the easiest laws in the world for accessing assistance in dying.
Why are we disgusted at this treatment of veterans when people with disabilities are also dying by this means when they cannot get help.
There should be a law to cover all vulnerable people. Because there are no safeguards to prevent advising someone to use MAID, the person at Veterans’ Affairs will probably not be punished as they did nothing wrong.
Sandra Phillips
North Saanich
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times 91原创, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, B.C. V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
