Monday, March 25, 2013

Independent to run in North Van-Seymour for May 14 Provnicial Election

Candidate Jaime Webbe
                                                         http://www.jaimewebbe.com/

                                             Personal Message
I am seeking election so that we, the people of the North Vancouver-Seymour riding, will 
have a better Government – one that doesn’t call campaigning ‘governing’, one in which 
change for the better is more than ideas that have already been tried and failed, and one in 
which common sense isn’t considered revolutionary.
As the mother of two young children, I want to ensure that they grow up in a British 
Columbia that delivers a wealth of opportunity - culturally, environmentally and 
economically. For that to happen, we need a provincial government that is working for us 
not for the Liberals or NDP. We need to take a stand as constituents and vote for the 
change we want, not against whichever party’s failed us least.
                                        

42 comments:

Jaime Webbe said...

Thanks John, I really look forward to hearing what your readers think of an independent running.

I know there is a lot of skepticism concerning the effectiveness of an independent but if there's one think I learned from my years with the United Nations, it's how to be an effective cog in a giant bureaucracy.

George Pringle said...

You seem like a Green Party candidate. Is there a reason why you didn't run with the Greens?

John Sharpe said...

Running as an independent eliminates the party nomination process.

Jaime Webbe said...

I actually seriously considered it because of the extent to which the Green Party encourages independence among their candidates.

They also have some great policies such as the call for an Advocate for Persons with Disabilities and the commitment to ban pesticides for household use.

However, I believe that sustainability solutions should led by industry and local communities with the government playing a supporting role. In contrast, the Green Party policy on the government regulated hard emission caps for major emitters and an 85% reduction in emissions from vehicles seem costly and unlikely to succeed.

In all fairness, the Green Party does support candidates who disagree with some of their policies but I feel I can make more of an impact as an independent.

When it comes down to it, when I knock on doors and say I'm an independent, I'm an oddity and people seem curious - as a Green Party candidate I would have much less credibility preaching beyond the choir.

Anonymous said...

Word has it that the Conservatives have also chosen their candidate in Seymour and it's NOT who you think it is. Should be interesting...

Anonymous said...

A good NDP candidate...Check
A plucky left of centre independant...Check
A low grade Green party candidate...Pending

Despite the unpopularity of the BC Liberals, a split on the left = a BC Liberal win in Lynn Valley - Seymour.

Your only hope would be to heap on a good BC Con candidate and a credible conservative independant to confuse the traditionally right of centre voters... Then you might have a race.

Jaime Webbe said...

It's going to be an experience that's for sure.

I wonder if the strongly rural focused conservatives will be able to make much headway in this riding though. I guess it really does depend who they nominate.

I heard one good name floating around but then heard counter-rumors that he has something else in mind.

Ah, the intrigue.

Anonymous said...

I wish you the most success Jaime. I will be asking questions at the only one scheduled all candidates' meeting for North Van Seymour.

I wonder what your thoughts are regarding the recent report by our childrens' watchdog and how the BC Libs have left our children in care and other children, to flounder.

And again BC has one of the highest rates of children in poverty in Canada.

How would you address this?

Anonymous said...

Looks like the BC Conservatives have announced their Lonsdale candidate...

Jeff Sprague, North Vancouver-Lonsdale - born in Saint John, New Brunswick, Jeff moved to British Columbia at the age of 14. He graduated from Richmond Senior Secondary High School and later completed the Paralegal Diploma Program at Capilano College.

For the last 10 years he's worked in the security and para-legal field, and holds a valid BC Security Employee's license.

Active with the BC Conservative Party since 2011, Jeff has served as both President and Vice-President of the North Vancouver-Lonsdale constituency association. In his spare time, he pursues his passion for music as the front-man for a local cover band.

Jaime Webbe said...

Yeah, you think we'd be able to do better for our children. With regards to what I'd do, I don't think there's one single fix for children from 0 to 18.

For the older children (say 15 and over) I think empowerment is key. I understand that there are resource limitations preventing social workers from developing long term plans so why not initiate a program for the children themselves to make them aware of the opportunities they do have. Bring these children together so that they can start to take control of their own futures. Teach them the skills they need to drive their plans. I would eventually expand it to a mentorship program once a few kids had successfully gone through the system.

With regards to very young children, I think we need to start looking at other provinces for good practices. Alberta, for example, has a world class program for the treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, which ensures that both people suffering from the disorder and their caregivers have the lifelong support that they need. We should look to replicate this, and other programs like it, both for the children who are already in long term care, as well as those who may be at risk of entering the system so that we can keep as many children as possible out of long term care.

With regards to childhood poverty, adequate child care is critical to allowing parents to enter and stay in the workforce. BC could do much more in this regard. I also think that medication should be free for all children under 16 but I'd have to look at the budget before saying whether this is feasible in BC or not.

What are your ideas?

Anonymous said...

I know this is going to ruffle a few feathers, but how about doing things the old fashioned way for a change by making a few sacrifices, and have one parent deciding to stay home with their children during their formative years. You don't need to have international summer vacations and a week at Whistler/Disneyland/Hawaii (take your pick) during spring break. I know of several families who have made this decision, and despite the perceived hardship of living on one salary, they have made it work, and feel they are better for it. Not only are they imparting their own values to their children, they are actually enjoying life a little more. It isn't always about income, it's about the quality of life and knowing that you're doing right by your children.

Jaime Webbe said...

No feathers ruffled here. I left my job at the United Nations so I could cut back to only 3 days a week. But I was very lucky to have a job that allowed me to work part time and still support my family.

Some people don't have that luxury which is why I think that affordable, high quality child care needs to be a viable option for those otherwise facing poverty. Not everyone needs to take advantage of it, but it should be there for those who so choose.

Anonymous said...

Oooh! Left the UN, Green-leaning politics, independent. We don't need more socialism here.

Jaime Webbe said...

Socialism...well if there's one thing I've never been accused of it's being a socialist.

I do want to make sure my kids have something left when I'm done with it all but that's more about being responsible than being socialist.

It's interesting to hear that I come off that way though - do my years at the World Bank make me less of a socialist?

Anonymous said...

Not really. :)

The poster was probably referring to the pro-big government nature of all of the organizations you seem to be involved with.

Conservatives may appreciate the austere measures invoked by the World Bank and IMF on socialist governments, but those same measures should be considered by the world bank with its over 9000 employees, let alone the UN with over 15,000 employees in the secretariat alone.

I think I can assume by your last name that you are generally supportive of development and probably have some fiscal conservative blood in you somewhere. :)

Jaime Webbe said...

Ok, they're big organizations but they serve about 5.5 billion people living in the developing world so really, the ratio's pretty good.

As for development - yes I support it. I think the era of environmental idealism is over and it's time for environmental pragmatism to step up.

That means recognizing the reality that almost everyone wants development, but there's a smart way to do it. I'm all about promoting the smart approach.

John Sharpe said...

And what in your humble opinion might be that "smart way?"

What is your opinion on the DNV OCP in regards to how it applies to the Lynn Valley area?

There is a s trong polarity on the issue of highrise development specifically in Lynn Valley. Are you aware of this and what is your opinion on that?

I know you're not running for council but, this is an integral issue within the riding which which you seek to be elected.

Anonymous said...

"I'm all about promoting the smart approach."

Everyone is all about supporting the "smart" approach. As an independant you don't have time for platitudes. You need to be a little more cutting edge and declare areas you would change.

Do you support the carbon tax being used to directly fund Translink, or should it continue to be used as a slush fund for Provincial photo ops? (my bias may be showing)

What about Provincial issues outside of your bailiwick, do you support class size and composition being a part of teachers contract negotiations?

Do you support the current balanced budget legislation?

Do you support BC Ferries being considered part of the highway system, or should the users be responsible for 100% of the operations? or (gasp) 100% of the Operations and Capital?

What are your ideas on First Nations treaties? Should the Province step back from the table for a bit and reassess deliverables? Or should they push for a few more treaties first?

Puppy mills... does anyone care about Thornthwaites private members bill?

Gaming funds? There are charities and there are charities, some should be core funded and other shouldn't be funded at all, but should the gaming funds be trotted out for photo ops?

You certainly have an established area of expertise in your portfolio, but you will need to appeal to a much broader audinece to break the 5% mark.

Anonymous said...

Whoa!
Give Jamie a chance. I like what she has to say.

Anonymous said...

I am glad she is engaging, and I don't want to punish her for it, but we are early in the campaign and she needs to be prepared to speak on all of these topics going forward.

She seems capable, one question at a time was far too pedestrian.

Jaime Webbe said...

Hah, so you want a more developed platform from an independent than the soon to be governing party has?

Ok, here it goes...

1. On the high-rises - my problem with this is that a consultative process needs to demonstrate responsiveness. People, who are already feeling disenfranchised in municipal politics are only going to feel more so if decisions go against the plan they helped build.

As an MLA, though, I think the provincial government needs to play a stronger role in addressing affordability in partnership with the municipalities.

I've come across a lot of constituents who don't want increased density but do want their kids to be able to afford to live nearby - no squaring that circle without close collaboration between communities, developers, and both municipal and provincial governments.

In the end, I do think increased density is inevitable but, living in an area (cascades) where the district has decided that no new development will be approved no matter what I wonder exactly how that will be achieved without municipal governments back tracking on at least some of their community plans.

2. On the carbon tax - I actually think that the carbon tax could be raised slightly (not as much as the greens are proposing) and anything that's above and beyond what is already collected should be split between Translink and BC Ferries (both of which I think should be at least partially subsidized by the government because they do support a huge part of the Province's economy). This won't be enough but reform is certainly needed before Translink should consider expanding too much.

3 On teacher negotiations - no I don't think class size and composition should be part of the discussions. Negotiations between the unions and the Province are confrontational - that's what you want (or rather expect) when salaries and benefits are being discussed.

In contrast, class sizes and composition should be discussed in a collaborative setting. I would like to see such issues discussed between parents, students (of older grades), teachers, school boards, the government and unions (noting that the government and unions are only one stakeholder).

4. On the budget - nope, I don't like it. I think that government operating costs should be balanced no matter what the economic conditions are, but I think that healthcare and education need to be adequately funded every budget cycle. Run a deficit if you need to on these two items BUT don't increase their budget when times are good - bank the money so that even if we run an annual deficit, we're able to maintain a long term surplus.

Also selling government assets is not a revenue stream!

Ok, my youngest has fallen back into the habit of waking up at 5:30 so I'll get back to you on the rest tomorrow.

Jaime Webbe said...

PS: Feel free to hold me to any of these - or to try to convince me otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Young family eh?

How will you manage the job and family?

MLAs are typically away from 100 to 150 days a year. While the house is sitting you need to be in Victoria from at least 8am Monday until 6pm Thursday (using the helijet, if you use the ferries you should plan on leaving Sunday evening).

(This is a private question you need to ask yourself, not a public one)

Anonymous said...

From the main post...

"We need to take a stand as constituents and vote for the
change we want, not against whichever party’s failed us least."

If I vote against the party which failed me the least doesn't that mean I'm voting for the party which failed me the most?

I think it should read "...not for the party that has failed us the leaast"

Fix that before you trot it out on literature.

Anonymous said...

Jaime,

You write: I've come across a lot of constituents who don't want increased density but do want their kids to be able to afford to live nearby - no squaring that circle without close collaboration between communities, developers, and both municipal and provincial governments."

My question is: "How do you justify the building of market condominiums as a solution to the "affordable housing" issue?

Many, many low-income families are pushed out of the area so that market housing is built. How does this help young people stay in the community when the purchase or rental of these condos is far more out of their reach than the lower income rentals that have been razed?

John Sharpe said...

Anon 10:08 AM,

Very good question.

Anonymous said...

What rental housing is being razed? And if you're talking about privately owned single-family homes or apartment buildings, why shouldn't the owners sell for a profit? They're in a business to make money, not do the governments job by providing low income housing.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 7:13 you are correct. However, the point being made is that using the "affordable housing" card when approving these eyesores called market condos is a "spin" and is incorrect.

Anonymous said...

The term 'affordable' is relative. A condo in a tower or other higher density housing type is likely going to be a more affordable housing option than a single family detached house. Particularly for someone starting out on the property ladder. So, it isn't really 'spin'. Eyesore is opinion only. You may not care for the appearance of a development, while I might.

Jaime Webbe said...

This debate seems to have migrated somewhat - I'm not an urban planner, I have no particular expertise in this area so can't respond with a magic bullet. It's great reading everyone's comments - this seems to be a very polarizing issue.

Oh yeah:

1. On ferries - it shouldn't be part of the highway system but should be subsidized

2. On First Nations treaties - the Federal government has shown that they can't be trusted to respect the rights of first nations, in such cases the Province must defend its residents, regardless of their status

3. On puppy mills - seriously, who's going to say that they oppose legislation on improved treatment of animals. As to whether I care - we're dog-less now but have always had rescue dogs in the past. Teaching owners / purchasers of pets how to be responsible consumers is the best approach. It worked for dolphin's and tuna, why can't it work for puppies and kittens.

4. Gaming funds - I'm not sure what your question is here. Are you asking if I support gambling or if I support how the proceeds are being allocated? Thanks for the clarification.

Anonymous said...

I'm curious about your comments about the Federal Government... Which charter rights are being violated by the Federal government?

Jaime Webbe said...

It's not what, it's how. The Federal government isn't consulting First Nations on issues such as the removal of protection for waterways that they rely on as well as changes to fishing rights.

I'm not saying that it always happens, just that when it does, and when it is of concern to BC, the provincial government should object.

Anonymous said...

I'm suspicious of your motivation,

Are you supportive of the First Nations because you support First Nations? Or are you supportive of them in this instance because they may be able to slow down a decision you disagree with?

Be careful what you wish for. The First Nations may have very different motivations than you do.

Cap River Massacre

They may not be the biodiversity giants you hope they are.

John O'Flynn said...

Jamie,

If you could answer the following questions:


1. If elected, will you support the right of parents to be the prime determiners of the nature of their children’s education?

Yes __________ No _________

2. If elected, will you stand up for the continued right of parents, under financial conditions at least as favourable as at the present, to have their children educated in separate schools, by distance education, and by homeschooling?

Yes __________ No __________

3. Under the Corren Agreement, activists were guaranteed that organizations favoured by them would have a right to input into the changing of curriculum.

Will you work to ensure that the provincial government guarantees parents a voice in opposing the introduction of curriculum that contradicts their moral standards?

Yes ___________ No __________

4. Will you work to allow parents to withdraw their children from classes when material will be introduced which parents may regard as too sensitive for their children or which they consider contradicts their family moral standards?

Yes, I will work to procure the recognition of this right. _________

No, I do not support this right. _________


5. Will you work to change the Infants Act so that schools are not allowed to refer students for abortions or to abortion-providing agencies?

Yes ______________ No ___________

Kind Regards,

John O'Flynn

griffin said...

Interesting that Mr. O'Flynn has answers to these questions posed to Jaime, but revealed under another candidate's announcement. As I said there, this is a totally inappropriate venue to be answering questions that are so loaded with barbed wire and nails. Ignore this man.

John O'Flynn said...

griffin, interesting how you fear and warn off questions and conversation by those who wish to lead and represent us.

I do appreciate the quick response of Independent North Van-Seymour Candidate Jamie Webbe.

"Thanks John, of course I'd be happy to answer your questions.

Please let me know if you want any additional details on my views or responses.

Kind regards, Jaime
1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. No
5. No"

1. If elected, will you support the right of parents to be the prime determiners of the nature of their children’s education?

Yes __________ No _________

2. If elected, will you stand up for the continued right of parents, under financial conditions at least as favourable as at the present, to have their children educated in separate schools, by distance education, and by homeschooling?

Yes __________ No __________

3. Under the Corren Agreement, activists were guaranteed that organizations favoured by them would have a right to input into the changing of curriculum.

Will you work to ensure that the provincial government guarantees parents a voice in opposing the introduction of curriculum that contradicts their moral standards?

Yes ___________ No __________

4. Will you work to allow parents to withdraw their children from classes when material will be introduced which parents may regard as too sensitive for their children or which they consider contradicts their family moral standards?

Yes, I will work to procure the recognition of this right. _________

No, I do not support this right. _________


5. Will you work to change the Infants Act so that schools are not allowed to refer students for abortions or to abortion-providing agencies?

Yes ______________ No ___________

Anonymous said...

Just a note that Jeff Sprague was not nominated by the BCCP Nth Van Lonsdale membership and overall has not shown to have been active.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like somebody is continuing to stir up trouble but why do it on Jaime Webbe's page? Mr. Sprague could not have become the candidate unless he had enough signatures on his nomination papers, and I don't believe that BCCP HQ would have accepted him without some blessing from the Constituency Association.

And how do you define "active"? Sh*t disturbing?

alan said...

We are both looking for an alternitve to the morons that have misruled for so long.What we need is far less government and for the regional problems the answer is easy stop sending money to Ottawa and victoria.The only way to deal with bureacraracy is to make it smaller.No Agenda 21 please

Anonymous said...

Please translate into something understandable.

John O'Flynn said...

John,

I believe that when it comes to education, parents should be able to choose the best educational program for their child, for example parents could send their child to a faith-based school in the independent school system. In BC, this currently includes traditional public schooling, distributed learning, homeschooling, or attending an independent school. The Independent School Act gives independent schools the ability to provide education in a way that has a particular cultural or religious component, as long as it is consistent with the guidelines set out in the Act, and I believe this is appropriate.

The BC Liberal Government has also been focused on bringing more flexibility and personalized learning to public education. 18 months ago the BC Education Plan was launched, focused around five areas: personalized learning for every student, quality teaching, flexibility and choice, high standards, and learning empowered by technology. I support this exciting plan and I want to continue its goals.



I encourage parents to have input into their child's education in many ways, and that includes having input into curriculum through contact with their teachers, school trustees, their school board, and the Ministry of Education.


Sincerely yours,

Jane Thornthwaite

John O'Flynn said...

Thank you for your questions.

There are some real issues with these questions that cannot be and should not be addressed appropriately with a simple "yes" or "no", especially given the reality of our multicultural and multidemonitional society. However, I feel compelled to answer in very general terms:

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Yes - a personal/family matter, not the school's

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Brian R. Wilson
BC Conservative Candidate
North Vancouver- Seymour