Governments Professional Reliance Review

[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. http://engage.gov.bc.ca/govtogetherbc/consultation/professional-reliance-review/

It's very important to at least complete the on-line survey if you aren't happy how environmental decisions are made. I hope folks here will go the site and at least complete the survey since time is almost up. This is a province wide initiative.

I'm retired, but held QP credentials for 25 years. If you snooze you lose your chance to have a say.

Go fill out the survey!

[Bernie O]

Thanks for the post. I did not know about this.

[Mulehahn]

Thanks for the link. I am involved both in my professionally and volunteer with organizations that are both greatly affected by QPs. Let them know of several flaws in the system.

[hillman]

I won't get into a rant, but I hope lots of folks do the online survey. Deadline is tomorrow at 4 PM

Most senior government bureaucrats are carrier politicians who look after each other. If you think there is a pattern of institutional shenanigans such as stonewalling your voice and input in important decisions speak up.

There isn't a single submission about fish or wildlife QP decisions that I noted. Seems that government QPs have a culture of picking and choosing what rules they follow and are very rarely if ever are they held accountable.

I'll shut now.

[Ltbullken]

Done! It is easy and quick, so all hunters should do it!

[Jagermeister]

I won't get into a rant, but I hope lots of folks do the online survey. Deadline is tomorrow at 4 PM

Most senior government bureaucrats are carrier politicians who look after each other. If you think there is a pattern of institutional shenanigans such as stonewalling your voice and input in important decisions speak up.

There isn't a single submission about fish or wildlife QP decisions that I noted. Seems that government QPs have a culture of picking and choosing what rules they follow and are very rarely if ever are they held accountable.

I'll shut now.
What makes you think that responding to the survey is going to change anything? Given who assembled the survey and who is going to collect the data, one might as well blow smoke up a dead ducks ass.

[hillman]

I'm not in the business of giving advice, but what I understand is the legal counsel from the Forest Practices Board is on leave to oversee the this review.

The FPB is about as independent a group around, and I believe folks there have a very high degree of integrity... unlike the senior bureaucrats who protect the politicians and ministers. The FPB has a narrow mandate so they usually have one hand tied behind their back.

I suggest you give the Executive Director of FPB a phone call. I'm confident he will make a point of speaking to you. I have always found they have an open door policy... but that's all I can say.

The survey has provisions for you to make comments. If you sit on the fence and don't participate, that's your choice

Learning is something you have to do for yourself. Over and out.

[2chodi]

But I am disappointed the BCWF hasn't made a formal submission to the

The BCWF, in fact, did make a formal submission.

[Rob Chipman]

Done......

[Foxton Gundogs]

The BCWF, in fact, did make a formal submission.

What he said

[Steeleco]

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!!

[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.

[horshur]

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...

[Jagermeister]

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)

[Dredman]

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?

[Steele Shot]

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.

[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.

[BCWF]

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/sites/272/2018/01/BC-Wildlife-Federation.pdf

[boxhitch]

Baby steps

Province takes first steps to improve system that makes industry consultants responsible for environmental monitoring
Judith Lavoie (https://thenarwhal.ca/author/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 (https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018ENV0078-002045) introduced in the B.C. legislature Monday.

https://thenarwhal.ca/how-b-c-proposes-to-roll-back-industry-self-regulation/

[JKerr]

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.