Open processes be it in governance, justice, education or some other institution empowered to carry out tasks the society needs to manage collectively, address the fundamental principle of democracy, that of eliminating differential power in the society. This because the presence of differential power precludes Freedom – this being the ultimate concern of humans, amply evidenced by the rivers of blood shed for it.
Open process is the best known defense against the denial of the rights and freedoms which comprise the “Liberty” we cherish. Information is power, therefore secret process in government disempowers the people relative to the magistrates, thereby eroding Democracy.
The ICBC “fire” AG Eby spoke about, was not spontaneous combustion. The ICBC has been maligned by politicians acting “ideologically” instead of sensibly, and other sub-tribes who have attached themselves to and feed from the faults built, some inadvertently others intentionally built into the ICBC system.
Eby sought to fix the ICBC, which is incumbent for him. But he proceeded substantially in the manner of those who had set the ICBC on “fire”. This resulted in half-measures which he could have averted had he taken a fresh approach.
After Eby rang the fire alarm, groups of “stakeholders” and “ordinary” individuals made submissions for reforming it. Sadly, Eby responded with the “Fake Openness Trick” invented by the PRopaganda industry for neutering the democratic institution of Open Debate. This trick consists of inviting public input, wastebasketing what comes in, and then paternalistically asserting that the public input has been assimilated in the un-debated “privately” made decision. It usually results in “good stuff in, garbage out”!
I addressed a couple of letters to Eby about ICBC and I copied them in the Marketplace. One was on February 23, 2018, suggesting that the ICBC Insurance Premium be collected partly on vehicle Plates, on drivers’ Licences and on vehicle Fuel, the apportioning to be determined by Actuaries.
The other was on January 1, 2019, suggesting outlawing, at least in the ICBC precinct, “contingency lawyering” which is a euphemism for Lawyers splitting with the “victims” the max they can wrangle from the ICBC. But “ambulance chasing” is unbecoming members of a “learned profession” ...
Eby did not acknowledge my letters, this manifesting that he could not argue against my submissions. Denial of awareness was the best he could come up with, and this he stashed “up his sleeve” for any eventuality. Surely his decisions for fixing ICBC are no good on the background of my submission and the unknown number of others submissions Eby may have wastebasketed.
Eby’s ICBC flame-dousing keeps equal the insurance premium charged a senior couple who drive to Sunday service with that of that charged to motorists touring the Earth or otherwise drive “long distance”. One need not be an actuary to see wrong in this.
Next Eby takes the same premium (per vehicle) from an individual who owns, say, 3 vehicles, as it does from a family of 3 who share one vehicle. This is wrong too.
Next, Eby leaps into the bizarre and charges good drivers for the eventuality of a bad driver using their vehicle, instead of charging the bad driver for the eventuality of driving peoples vehicle.
As Eby stated, Lawyers get half of the monies ICBC pays out, which ostensibly is a fair compensation for the “victims”. But no sophistry may conceivably justify the lawyers depriving the victims from half of their entitlement. If on the other hand, the Lawyers wrangle from the ICBC double the fair entitlement of the victims, this is equally reprehensible because it involves misleading the Courts and stealing from the ICBC.
Eby bangs his chest with pride for introducing a claim tariff, and rightly so. He deserves credit for putting his foot on the door to where Lawyers denied entry to his predecessors. But, who knows, he may have been let do that in exchange for opening up a new lucrative market, that of litigating “occasional driver” issues.
And that is not all. Eby’s scheme bureaucratizes the renewal of a vehicle licence which certainly is more than merely a bureaucratic irritant.