Dear Editor:
I read Elizabeth James’ column and West Vancouver Coun. (Craig) Cameron’s reply with interest. Both have good points for us all to consider.
What follows is how I see TransLink.
I am not a pundit nor do I have a deep knowledge of politics.
I thought the Campbell Liberals were giving us an efficient, low-maintenance and low-cost racehorse when they reconstituted TransLink. I think we got a three-humped camel with all the worst attributes to usefulness.
Let me explain.
The province called for a non-binding plebiscite.
The mayors’ council was to determine the method of raising the money and to draft the plebiscite question that had to be submitted to the province for approval/vetting.
The province could add conditions (certain items would be exempt, but we do not know the items) and constraints and make changes as they saw fit.
Is this passing the buck or what?
This reminds me of the old joke when all the parts of the body were arguing with each other on who was to be the king and thus rule. Almost all the parts had their say and justifications for being king.
The last to have the say was the part we all sit on. This part said that it had heard all the arguments and all were important, but if I stop working you will all be history.
The question I ask all concerned is: would they bet money on the three-humped camel?
My own view is: fix the governance first.
Put a transparent and accountable system in place that we, the taxpayers (the part that we sit on) can understand. Tell us what the long-range transportation plan is and the incremental way to achieve this plan. Then come and ask us if we want to pay for it.
Until then, you are not getting my vote because I feel the money raised will go the same way as the Compass Card — over-budget and inoperable yet.
I ask my fellow taxpayers: do you want more tax money wasted?
John Consiglio
North Vancouver
