We lack effective regional governance
Times Colonist Letters
October 9, 2014
Re: “Get talking on amalgamation,” editorial, Oct. 4.
Congratulations to Amalgamation Yes for prevailing to the point that the majority of the voters in the region will now get a say on whether the question of properly examining our regional and local governance structure should be pursued. Had they proposed a better question, it is likely everyone could have gotten on the same page with the same question by election day.
While it is apparent Amalgamation Yes believes that salvation lies in amalgamation, it is unfortunate that its question reflected that bias: “Are you in favour of reducing the number of municipalities in the Capital Regional District through amalgamation?” What this question failed to respect was that some of the hoped-for respondents perhaps hadn’t reached the same conclusion that it was simply the number of municipalities that was problem. Maybe they had other solutions. Maybe they simply didn’t know what the solution was and wouldn’t want to commit to the one proposed.
The number of municipalities is just the symptom of the greater problem, which is the lack of effective regional governance. A reformulated CRD with real accountability and jurisdiction in critical areas could be an answer. None of us will really know until an in-depth study has done a thorough examination of what we’ve got, options for alternatives and the ramifications of any changes.
That, at the heart of it, is what Amalgamation Yes was advocating. It’s just too bad that it muddied the water so much.
Jim Jaarsma
Victoria
Times Colonist Letters
October 9, 2014
Re: “Get talking on amalgamation,” editorial, Oct. 4.
Congratulations to Amalgamation Yes for prevailing to the point that the majority of the voters in the region will now get a say on whether the question of properly examining our regional and local governance structure should be pursued. Had they proposed a better question, it is likely everyone could have gotten on the same page with the same question by election day.
While it is apparent Amalgamation Yes believes that salvation lies in amalgamation, it is unfortunate that its question reflected that bias: “Are you in favour of reducing the number of municipalities in the Capital Regional District through amalgamation?” What this question failed to respect was that some of the hoped-for respondents perhaps hadn’t reached the same conclusion that it was simply the number of municipalities that was problem. Maybe they had other solutions. Maybe they simply didn’t know what the solution was and wouldn’t want to commit to the one proposed.
The number of municipalities is just the symptom of the greater problem, which is the lack of effective regional governance. A reformulated CRD with real accountability and jurisdiction in critical areas could be an answer. None of us will really know until an in-depth study has done a thorough examination of what we’ve got, options for alternatives and the ramifications of any changes.
That, at the heart of it, is what Amalgamation Yes was advocating. It’s just too bad that it muddied the water so much.
Jim Jaarsma
Victoria
