Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2chodi
The BCWF, in fact, did make a formal submission.
Just because it wasn't posted here on HBC doesn't mean it didn't happen!!
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Look, the first page is the discrediting page.
We are interested in your level of knowledge with the use of qualified professionals within the following: |
|
Very Knowledgeable |
Knowledgeable |
Little Knowledge |
Not at all Knowledgeable |
|
Resource Use (e.g. forestry operations, mining operations, water use, oil and gas) |
|
Protection of habitats and species (e.g. Riparian Areas Regulation) |
|
Discharges of waste to environment (e.g. industrial and municipal discharges to land, air, water) |
|
Reclamation activities (e.g. contaminated sites) |
|
Infrastructure (e.g. resource roads, facility designs) |
|
Other |
|
|
Very few of us can answer one of the questions let alone all of them. The first page is the "punt page". It's skewed. If you are not checking off the first or second selection, your responses are redundant and you will be zapped quicker than a fly getting whacked with my electronic fly swatter.
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jagermeister
Look, the first page is the discrediting page.
We are interested in your level of knowledge with the use of qualified professionals within the following: |
|
Very Knowledgeable |
Knowledgeable |
Little Knowledge |
Not at all Knowledgeable |
|
Resource Use (e.g. forestry operations, mining operations, water use, oil and gas) |
|
Protection of habitats and species (e.g. Riparian Areas Regulation) |
|
Discharges of waste to environment (e.g. industrial and municipal discharges to land, air, water) |
|
Reclamation activities (e.g. contaminated sites) |
|
Infrastructure (e.g. resource roads, facility designs) |
|
Other |
|
|
Very few of us can answer one of the questions let alone all of them. The first page is the "punt page". It's skewed. If you are not checking off the first or second selection, your responses are redundant and you will be zapped quicker than a fly getting whacked with my electronic fly swatter.
You are knowledgeable about several of those categories don't sell yourself short...
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
horshur
You are knowledgeable about several of those categories don't sell yourself short...
If one lacks brilliance, baffle them with bullshit, eh? (And never mind Egan)
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Is this survey an appropriate medium to express co cern about the future of our wildlife due to non science based decisions and politicizing conservation?
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hillman
I know this is the 11th hour to make a submission. But I am disappointed the BCWF hasn't made a formal submission to the Professional Reliance Review that started Dec. 1 and closes Jan. 19.
Hillman I have no idea where your BCWF information came from but the BCWF has indeed filed an official response and did so before you post. Making others aware of the survey is a good thing but there is absolutely no need to be "disappointed in the BCWF.
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Steele Shot - If BCWF made a submission I apologize to BCWF for being disappointed. I have been a member and supporter for a long time.
I checked the PRR submission site an hour before the deadline, and it still didn't show up even though the site said they would "be posted as they are received". I'm interested why it was not posted along with around 40+ others.
Today the PRR submissions are gone. Looks like once the dead line passed, they shut it down. I will make a point to be on the look out for it.
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hillman
Steele Shot - If BCWF made a submission I apologize to BCWF for being disappointed. I have been a member and supporter for a long time.
I checked the PRR submission site an hour before the deadline, and it still didn't show up even though the site said they would "be posted as they are received". I'm interested why it was not posted along with around 40+ others.
Today the PRR submissions are gone. Looks like once the dead line passed, they shut it down. I will make a point to be on the look out for it.
Hi Hillman,
Yes, the BCWF did make a formal submission.
Please find it at this link.
https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads...Federation.pdf
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Baby steps
Province takes first steps to improve system that makes industry consultants responsible for environmental monitoring
Judith Lavoie
Oct 23, 2018 6 min read
It’s no secret British Columbians have little faith in the province’s system of ‘professional reliance’ — an arrangement that essentially outsources government’s responsibility to enforce environmental regulations to industry.
It is enough of a concern in the province that the B.C. NDP campaigned on a promise to review the system designed by the former BC Liberal government, which allowed industry-hired professionals to do work that was previously conducted by government employees.
Now the province is taking steps to regain control of environmental monitoring — after 16 years of professional reliance — with a bill introduced in the B.C. legislature Monday.
https://thenarwhal.ca/how-b-c-propos...lf-regulation/
Re: Governments Professional Reliance Review
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jagermeister
Look, the first page is the discrediting page.
We are interested in your level of knowledge with the use of qualified professionals within the following: |
|
Very Knowledgeable |
Knowledgeable |
Little Knowledge |
Not at all Knowledgeable |
|
Resource Use (e.g. forestry operations, mining operations, water use, oil and gas) |
|
Protection of habitats and species (e.g. Riparian Areas Regulation) |
|
Discharges of waste to environment (e.g. industrial and municipal discharges to land, air, water) |
|
Reclamation activities (e.g. contaminated sites) |
|
Infrastructure (e.g. resource roads, facility designs) |
|
Other |
|
|
Very few of us can answer one of the questions let alone all of them. The first page is the "punt page". It's skewed. If you are not checking off the first or second selection, your responses are redundant and you will be zapped quicker than a fly getting whacked with my electronic fly swatter.
Most idiots with an Internet connection think they're very knowledgeable about everything these days, just follow their lead and hit the first box.