Joy Thorkelson speaks out on oil tanker issue

General Forums General Chat
1

Councillor Joy Thorkelson, who is also the UFAWU representative for Northern British Columbia has taken pen to paper and composed a defence of the plans to make permanent a moratorium on tanker traffic on the north coast.

The councillor’s thoughts appear in The Province today, a guest column that outlines the opposition of those in the commercial fishery, as well as those communities along the coast and on the inland waters that depend on that fishery for their livelihoods and economic base.

(from the blog a town called podunk, click on the link below to see the entire item atowncalledpodunk.blogspot.com/2 … -side.html)

2

WOW! A councillor speaking out on a issue they have a great deal of knowledge in, imagine that. Is this COI or due diligence?

3

Well I imagine she is speaking out with her UFAWU cap on so not sure it’s a conflict of interest and at any rate, all councillors are entitled to an opinion, it’s just kind of rare for them to express them all that often.

4

It doesnt matter which hat she is wearing, I find it commendable that Joy constantly fights for, and, puts herself out there on behalf of the people she is representing.
There has been alot of “movement”, or “action”, being taken, by some of the less experienced councillors to address the public concerns. Yes this is a jab at these other councillors, who could take something from Joy Thorkelson, it is conviction and action, she is a long time councillor with plenty of grass roots support from the communitty. Kudos!!

5

[quote=“chiefdave”]It doesnt matter which hat she is wearing, I find it commendable that Joy constantly fights for, and, puts herself out there on behalf of the people she is representing.
There has been alot of “movement”, or “action”, being taken, by some of the less experienced councillors to address the public concerns. Yes this is a jab at these other councillors, who could take something from Joy Thorkelson, it is conviction and action, she is a long time councillor with plenty of grass roots support from the communitty. Kudos!![/quote]

Public commentary about Enbridge is good, but councillor Thorkelson shouldn’t be advocating for her employer’s position while wearing her councillor hat even if many of us happen to agree with her views on the issue.

The conflict is between a duty of loyalty to the interests or positions of an employer and a duty of loyalty to the citizens as an elected councillor. That is why councillor Ashley leaves the room when SD52 is on the agenda and why councillor Gordon-Payne leaves when health issues relating to her job arise.

The council is elected to carry out their jurisdiction, which is to collect taxes, provide local services and regulate certain activities. They can add their ‘voice’ on the great issues of the day, like the state of fishing industry or the HST for that matter, but in doing so they are really just another lobby group, probably less effective than others. This council doesn’t have a position on Enbridge that I can re call.

As for your jab against the “less experienced councillors”, presumably councillors Ashley and Garon, what do you think that they should be learning from councillor Thorkelson? Writing an op-ed in a newspaper? Using council meetings as a podium to speak on issues relating to a paid employment outside of council?

This council seems to have accomplished little other than increasing taxes, cutting services and otherwise maintaining the status quo. The list of positive accomplishments is very short. Councillor Garon successfully pushed for changes around parking. Councillor Ashley successfully pushed for greater information about closed council meetings (the last closed session included discussion of Watson Island, by the way). Both of them pushed for the community forums. Although not well attended, citizens comments there seem to have had some influence. The latest version of the revitalization bylaw provides far less of a tax break than the first version the administration proposed.

The only initiative that I can recall councillor Thorkelson taking was that the area be declaring a disaster zone because of the poor commercial fishing season. What came out of that? Get her off fish issues and she seems quite committed to the status quo; quite establishment in a way.

6

I guess we have differing opinions on the COI issue and how it relates to each councillors experience, many of the councillors were elected because of their areas of expertise.
joy, partially at least, was elected because she advocates on behalf of the working class(admittedly mostly fisherman) and environmental issues. She has plenty of experience in these issues and uses her voice, personal experience and professional experience to weigh in on these issues. I do not see any real personal benifit to Joy by talking about employment or environmental issues. I really think the COI issue is being used as a cop out, i think these certain councillors are more afraid of offending their employers rather than breaking the rules.
Maybe getting elected to city council should be these peoples full time job, instead of losing there expertise on certain issues.
In the end, as always, it the constituents who get it!

7

[quote=“chiefdave”]I guess we have differing opinions on the COI issue and how it relates to each councillors experience, many of the councillors were elected because of their areas of expertise.
joy, partially at least, was elected because she advocates on behalf of the working class(admittedly mostly fisherman) and environmental issues. She has plenty of experience in these issues and uses her voice, personal experience and professional experience to weigh in on these issues. I do not see any real personal benifit to Joy by talking about employment or environmental issues. I really think the COI issue is being used as a cop out, i think these certain councillors are more afraid of offending their employers rather than breaking the rules.
Maybe getting elected to city council should be these peoples full time job, instead of losing there expertise on certain issues.
In the end, as always, it the constituents who get it![/quote]

Yes, we hope that councillors bring some experience and perspective, but it becomes problematic when the issue on the table is one that their employer is paying them to work on and support. Unions can have positions on many public policy issues.

There is a line between advocating for employment and environmental issues, based on experience, and advocating for an employer’s position on specific employment and environmental issues. I expect that the fish union has had an official position on west coast oil tanker traffic for many years.

As for the other councillors being afraid to offend their employers, that illustrates the conflict. A councillor cannot be an effective representative of the city on an issue if they are influenced by fears of offending their employers.

When councillors Ashley and Gordon-Payne have left meetings the issues have not been particularly controversial from what I can recall. I doubt that they were afraid; they simply obeyed the rules in the Community Charter.

Another councillor who seems to push the rules is councillor Bedard, when Hecate Strait is on the agenda. She really should leave the meeting, because she has a conflicting duty.

Of course, one problem with this council is that they exclude the public from so many meetings that it is hard to know what positions individual councillors are taking.

I voted for councillor Thorkelson last time on the premise that she is a supporter of the working class and an environmentalist, and perhaps she is, but those issues don’t seem to come up much at council meetings, other than when she advocates for positions taken by the union; to whom she has a conflicting duty. She seems to be a one issue advocate, and otherwise go with the flow on a council that really needs some new ideas.

On the question of whether the council should provide some details about what topics are discussed in closed meetings, she supported councillor Ashley’s motion, along with councillors Garon and Kinney. My impression is that councillor Thorkelson has the swing vote on various issues but more often votes for the status quo than for change. I don’t know if I’ll vote for her next time.