tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-61155564333720768652024-03-13T19:29:22.781-07:00Votermedia Democracy BlogWe can reform our democracies, corporations and co-ops by creating better voter information systems: let voters allocate some community funds to competing media. More info at <a href="http://votermedia.org">votermedia.org</a>.Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.comBlogger225125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-41927047519129589822020-09-15T16:39:00.000-07:002020-09-15T16:39:37.864-07:00Could democratic governance have saved MEC from bankruptcy?<p style="text-align: left;">Sad news about Mountain Equipment Co-op: It has gone bankrupt, and has been sold to private for-profit investors:</p>
<blockquote><a href="https://www.mec.ca/en/explore/mec-to-be-acquired">mec.ca/en/explore/mec-to-be-acquired</a></blockquote>
<p style="text-align: left;">If only MEC's board has been more responsive to <a href="https://votermedia.blogspot.com/search/label/MEC">members' critiques about its lack of democracy</a>, maybe this disaster could have been prevented.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">From my 2012 paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/WeWantOurCo-opsBack.pdf">We Want Our Co-ops Back</a>:</p>
<blockquote><i><p>"Co-ops that grow large (e.g. over 10,000 members) often tend to become less democratic. Voter turnout falls, and boards become less accountable to members. Boards may create bylaws and rules that shift power from members to boards. Directors may become more allied with a co-op's senior staff than with the members."</p>
<p>"... if democratic reform includes a voter information system that gives voting members insight into which director candidates would better serve the co-op and thus its members, the result will be improved performance of the co-op."</p></i></blockquote>
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-10933346958552761482019-04-25T15:06:00.000-07:002019-04-25T15:08:01.415-07:00MEC Election: Why I'm voting for Steve JonesWe Mountain Equipment Co-op members are voting from now through May 23 to elect 3 directors. I'm voting for <b><a href="http://www.voteforsteve.ca">Steve Jones</a></b> because he pushes strongly to <b>restore democratic member control</b>, which the incumbent board has been undermining for several years now – see:<br />
<ul><li><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/mec-governance-changes-sparks-dissent-among-long-time-loyalists/article26852082/">theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/<b>mec-governance-changes-sparks-dissent-among-long-time-loyalists</b>/article26852082</a><br />
<br />
</li>
<li><a href="https://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/03/mec-ramps-up-suppression-of-member.html">votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/03/<b>mec-ramps-up-suppression-of-member</b>.html</a><br />
</li>
</ul>I'm also voting for:<br />
- <b><a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/8">Tamara Paton</a></b>: "I want MEC – and our Board – to feel less corporate and more co-operative."; and<br />
- <b><a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/6">Robert Henderson</a></b>: "I’m a nature lover with 6 years of board experience in large stakeholder-driven organizations."<br />
<br />
<b>Vote now through May 23: <a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/">https://elections.mec.ca/vote/</a></b><br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-70057251298735408942017-05-02T12:22:00.000-07:002019-03-21T10:05:35.332-07:00MEC Election: Why I'm voting for Steve JonesWe Mountain Equipment Co-op members are voting from now through May 25 to elect 3 directors. I'm voting for <b><a href="http://www.voteforsteve.ca/">Steve Jones</a></b> because he pushes strongly to <b>restore democratic member control</b>, which the incumbent board has been undermining for several years now – see:<br />
<ul><li><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/mec-governance-changes-sparks-dissent-among-long-time-loyalists/article26852082/">theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/<b>mec-governance-changes-sparks-dissent-among-long-time-loyalists</b>/article26852082</a><br />
<br />
</li>
<li><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/mountain-equipment-co-op-eases-board-applicant-rules/article32383675/">theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/<b>mountain-equipment-co-op-eases-board-applicant-rules</b>/article32383675</a><br />
<br />
</li>
<li><a href="https://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/03/mec-ramps-up-suppression-of-member.html">votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/03/<b>mec-ramps-up-suppression-of-member</b>.html</a><br />
</li>
</ul>I'm also voting for:<br />
- <b><a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/6">Patricia Eagar</a></b>, the only female candidate not recommended by the incumbent board; and<br />
- <b><a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/11">Bob Brent</a></b>, who advocates change in the election system.<br />
<br />
<b>Vote now through May 25: <a href="https://elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/13">elections.mec.ca/vote/#candidates/13</a></b><br />
<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-54505664498949504382017-03-24T13:04:00.000-07:002017-03-24T13:04:58.087-07:00FICOM Should Say No to Coast Capital Board<i><b>Transferring our credit union from BC to nation-wide is bad for its 500,000 members.</b></i><br />
<br />
Coast Capital Savings Credit Union's board of directors has launched a plan to expand nationally, which would increase their opportunities to benefit personally from their power and members' disempowerment. The dangers are well documented on this concerned member's website: <a href="https://governancewatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html">GovernanceWatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html</a>.<br />
<br />
In the past 10 years, Coast's board has changed the credit union in several ways that are harmful to members. They raised their pay to double that of Vancity Credit Union's board. A group of members compiled data showing that by 2011, Coast's board had increased its pay to over $750,000 while the Vancity board was paid less than $370,000 – see <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts/">coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts</a>. This sparked a member uprising that Coast's board is still trying to divert and ignore – see <a href="https://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/Coast%20Capital">votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/Coast Capital</a>.<br />
<br />
The board maintains its power by controlling the information conveniently available to members when they vote. Most are too busy to look beyond the board's spin, not realizing how poorly they are being served. So they trustingly vote as the board recommends.<br />
<br />
The BC Financial Institutions Commission (FICOM) can disallow Coast's national conversion if they find that Coast made inadequate disclosure to members before the approval vote – see <a href="https://www.fic.gov.bc.ca/pdf/fid/correspondence/OLTR-FedContinuance.pdf">fic.gov.bc.ca/pdf/fid/correspondence/OLTR-FedContinuance.pdf</a>. The one-sided nature of all the information Coast sent to members can certainly be seen as inadequate – see <a href="https://governancewatch.ca/Case%20Against%20Coast%20Capital%20Savings.pdf">governancewatch.ca/Case Against Coast Capital Savings.pdf</a>.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, FICOM has already been following policies that let BC credit union boards conduct member votes with very one-sided information; for examples:<br />
- <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/MarkLathamCommentsOnFICOMDraftCUGovernanceGuideline.pdf">votermedia.org/publications/MarkLathamCommentsOnFICOMDraftCUGovernanceGuideline.pdf</a><br />
- <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/2015-09-14-Latham-comments-on-FIA-CUIA-review.pdf">votermedia.org/publications/2015-09-14-Latham-comments-on-FIA-CUIA-review.pdf</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.governancewatch.ca/blog/2017-03-23%20Response%20from%20FICOM.pdf">They have also refused</a> a <a href="https://www.governancewatch.ca/blog/2017-03-21%20Letter%20to%20FICOM%20about%20public%20notice.pdf">Coast member's request</a> to extend beyond March 30 the public comment period on national conversion (via email to commission.consultation@ficombc.ca).<br />
<br />
<b><i>FICOM should reverse this trend and say no to Coast's board, <br />
thus protecting the financial security of British Columbians.</i></b><br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-55823437895466026422017-03-20T15:14:00.001-07:002017-03-20T15:24:38.447-07:00Why I'm Voting NO on Coast Capital Savings' proposed rules change<b>Coast Capital Savings</b> is <b><a href="https://national.coastcapitalsavings.com/specialresolution/">proposing a rules change</a></b> to pursue its aim to become a federal credit union. We members can vote from now through April 12, on paper ballots we receive in the mail, or by logging in at <a href="https://coastcapitalsavings.com/OnlineBanking">coastcapitalsavings.com/OnlineBanking</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>I'm voting NO</b> for the same reasons I voted NO on going national: the board's past behaviour gives me no confidence that they are acting in members' best interests. For example:<br />
<br />
- <b>Overpaying itself</b> with members' funds – see:<br />
<a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts/">coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts</a> <br />
<br />
- <b>Confusing members</b> with one-sided campaigns against members' resolutions – see:<br />
<a href="https://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html</a> <br />
<br />
<b>The dangers of going national</b> are well described at: <br />
<a href="https://governancewatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html">governancewatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html</a> <br />
<br />
See new report: <b>A Case Against Coast Capital Savings Becoming a Federal Credit Union</b><br />
Published March 16, 2017 at <b><a href="https://governancewatch.ca/">GovernanceWatch.ca</a></b>.<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-50039893363326893652016-11-18T13:55:00.000-08:002016-11-18T13:55:29.662-08:00A global software users' co-op could #BuyTwitterNathan Schneider's <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/29/save-twitter-buy-platform-shared-ownership">September 29 article</a> in <i>The Guardian</i> has sparked an enthusiastic movement to change Twitter from a corporation into a co-op; or if not Twitter itself, then "co-owning a major platform utility" – see <a href="http://internetofownership.net/campaigns/wearetwitter/">campaign page</a>. Campaign supporters are concerned that Twitter's perennial lack of profitability and declining stock price may lead to it being acquired, followed by cost cutting and revenue boosting measures that could undermine its considerable public benefits.<br />
<br />
I'd like to share some ideas with the #BuyTwitter movement. I'm a semi-retired financial economist working on democratic reform of corporations, governments and co-ops (<a href="https://linkedin.com/in/marklatham">linkedin.com/in/marklatham</a>).<br />
<br />
Below is an outline for building a global software users' co-op that can finance its own growth, to the point where it can either buy Twitter or fund a substitute and attract enough users. The strategy has 5 key components:<br />
<blockquote><b>1. Ownership structure:</b> Retail consumers' co-op.<br />
<br />
<b>2. Bundling of users:</b> Use large group purchases to get better deals. All co-op members can use all software licenses purchased.<br />
<br />
<b>3. Bundling of software:</b> Each member pays the same low fixed monthly user fee, e.g. $5. Co-op buys rights to use various software that members value: low-priced or freemium software/services like password manager, anti-virus; info like <a href="http://www.consumerreports.org">ConsumerReports.org</a>; discounts etc.<br />
<br />
<b>4. Buy from market-share challengers</b>, not leaders. Challengers will charge bundled users much less than market-share leaders would.<br />
<br />
<b>5. Members vote to allocate pooled funds</b> among competing software channels. This system has been developed and tested for providing coverage of student union elections at the University of British Columbia.</blockquote><b>Details are in the paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/GlobalSoftwareUsersCo-op.pdf">Global Software Users' Co-op</a> at <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications">votermedia.org/publications</a>.</b><br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-88831792448367213352016-10-17T15:46:00.002-07:002017-03-17T12:47:11.280-07:00Why I'm Voting NO on Coast Capital Savings Proposal to Go National<b>Coast Capital Savings</b> is proposing to become a <b>federal credit union</b>. We members can vote from today through November 28, on paper ballots we receive in the mail, or by logging in at <a href="https://coastcapitalsavings.com/OnlineBanking">coastcapitalsavings.com/OnlineBanking</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>I'm voting NO</b> because the board's past behaviour gives me no confidence that they are acting in members' best interests. For example:<br />
<br />
- <b>Overpaying itself</b> with members' funds – see:<br />
<a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts/">coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts</a> <br />
<br />
- <b>Confusing members</b> with one-sided campaigns against members' resolutions – see:<br />
<a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html</a> <br />
<br />
<b>The dangers of going national</b> are well described at: <br />
<a href="http://governancewatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html">governancewatch.ca/ThreatsToCoastCapitalsMembers.html</a> <br />
<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-8592445547544778592016-09-22T12:25:00.000-07:002016-09-22T15:05:06.147-07:00CIRA Board Election: Who I'm voting for & whyVoting just started today in the Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) board election. I currently plan to vote for these candidates:<br />
<blockquote><b>Members' Slate:<br />
- <a href="https://cira.ca/sites/default/files/public/FRANK%20MICHLICK-EN.pdf">Frank Michlick</a><br />
<br />
Nomination Committee Slate:<br />
- <a href="https://cira.ca/sites/default/files/public/lee-dale-2016.pdf">Lee Dale</a><br />
- <a href="https://cira.ca/sites/default/files/public/rowena-liang-2016.pdf">Rowena Liang</a><br />
- my third choice not decided yet</b></blockquote>All candidates' info is linked from <a href="https://cira.ca/election-results">this CIRA page</a>. Voting ends next Thursday (Sept 29) at noon Pacific time. I will update this post if I change my choices. <span style="color: #38761d;">If you're a CIRA member, you should receive an email from CIRA today with a link to their voting page.</span><br />
<br />
As when I <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/09/ciraelection-why-im-voting-for-moll.html">posted on last year's election</a>: "My research is not very deep, but there seems to be a lack of candidate assessments available online, so I'm trying to help fill that gap."<br />
<br />
This year, my voting is based mainly on the <a href="https://cira.ca/forum/613">online Campaign Forum</a>, where some important issues were debated. I think accountability of the board to the membership and to the Canadian internet community is crucial, so I paid close attention to these two threads:<br />
<br />
<b>- <a href="https://cira.ca/2016-campaign-forum/cira-membership-based-organization">CIRA as a Membership Based Organization</a></b><br />
<b><br />
</b> <b>- <a href="https://cira.ca/2016-campaign-forum/changing-ciras-board-selection-process">Changing CIRA's Board Selection Process</a></b><br />
<br />
I welcome your comments, advice, info etc!<br />
<br><br />
<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-73788375359856168642016-09-21T08:00:00.001-07:002016-12-12T10:30:01.388-08:00CIRA Election Forum<i>The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) is holding its annual board election. In the election campaign's online forum, there's an interesting thread on <span style="color: #38761d;"><b>CIRA as a Membership Based Organization</b></span>. Yesterday <a href="https://cira.ca/comment/164#comment-164">I posted a comment there</a>; I'm reposting it below (with better links) followed by some further thoughts. So although the election forum will be closed to comments after tomorrow noon (Eastern Time) when voting starts, we can continue discussing here.</i><br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<hr />
<br />
Great discussion on <a href="https://cira.ca/2016-campaign-forum/cira-membership-based-organization">this important topic</a>! Thank you <b>paulandersen</b> for launching it. I'm one of the few actively engaged CIRA members for the past five years – see my blog at <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/CIRA">votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/CIRA</a>. As you can see from the tag cloud there, I've studied various membership organizations, with a focus on engagement and accountability.<br />
<br />
Picking up on comments already made on this thread above:<br />
<br />
I agree with <a href="https://cira.ca/comment/112#comment-112"><b>Kerry Brown</b></a>: "... having a large number of members is important, even if the vast majority do not engage. It provides a check in case something goes wrong."<br />
<br />
I also agree with <a href="https://cira.ca/comment/121#comment-121"><b>leedale</b></a> and the "interested citizen who is not a .ca domain owner, that they were curious why this membership stipulation exists, particularly as CIRA continues to invest in other initiatives that impact them. <b>They would like to participate as a member, but without a .ca domain name, can't.</b> That's an interesting question to me as CIRA continues to build towards a better online Canada."<br />
<br />
Indeed, <a href="https://cira.ca/ca-domains">CIRA affirms</a> that "Proceeds from every .CA sold are reinvested directly into the Canadian Internet community through the Community Investment Program." As you can see from the <a href="https://cira.ca/build-better-internet/community-investment-program/find-project">CIP projects</a>, they benefit all Canadians, not just domain registrants. So CIRA sees the Canadian Internet community as including all Canadians who use the internet. <b>It would make sense to let any Canadian join CIRA, which would increase member engagement and accountability.</b><br />
<br />
Good suggestion <a href="https://cira.ca/comment/119#comment-119"><b>Rowena</b></a>, to consider letting members vote on Community Investment projects. CIRA could take a first step in that direction by <b>letting members vote to allocate a small budget among competing providers of voter information during the CIRA board election</b> each year. That would help us choose the best director candidates, and increase voter turnout by reducing the amount of research each member must do to vote intelligently. I've outlined this idea in several places, including:<br />
<br />
- <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2012/04/keep-canadas-internet-democratic-oppose.html">votermedia.blogspot.ca/2012/04/keep-canadas-internet-democratic-oppose.html</a><br />
<br />
- <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/2016-09-06-Latham-comments-on-Canadian-Journalism-Policy.pdf">votermedia.org/publications/2016-09-06-Latham-comments-on-Canadian-Journalism-Policy.pdf</a><br />
<br />
Discussions like this thread are too important to erase. We should enhance member information and engagement by keeping an <b>online forum open year-round</b> on any CIRA-related topics, with a special section for this election forum each year. It's often helpful to see what was said on a topic in the past, so we can build on it instead of reinventing it.<br />
<br />
Lack of member involvement in this election forum is also not surprising because of its design flaws:<br />
<br />
- <a href="https://cira.ca/comment/126#comment-126"><b>Frank_Michlick</b></a> above: "I do think the election site could use some improvements as well - I always find that I have to search for the timeline and details of the process and yet this isn't the first time I'm going through it."<br />
<br />
- <a href="https://cira.ca/2016-campaign-forum/linking-forum"><b>Rowena</b></a>: "Do you find it a bit difficult to find this forum if you don't know exactly where to go? My link goes to the CIRA Home page but I need to search to get to the Forum..." Indeed, on CIRA's home page there is no mention of the election or this forum. Reminds me of the movie "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" :-)<br />
<br />
- Once you get to <a href="https://cira.ca/forum/613">the forum</a>, you see the message "Get to know the final candidates!" But there's <b>no link to the <a href="https://cira.ca/election-results">list of candidates and their candidate statements</a></b>. If you got to the forum by a direct link (like from a CIRA email), good luck finding that important candidate info.<br />
<br />
- Arriving at the forum for the first time, you can see "Log in to post new content in the forum." <a href="https://cira.ca/user/login?destination=forum/613">Click that</a> and you find the instruction "Enter your Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) username." In the past 5 years I've been prompted to create several CIRA usernames, at member.cira.ca, cif.cira.ca, participate.cira.ca, and forum.cira.ca. So I tried them all, and they all failed. Then it occurred to me that the instruction should have said "<b>You now have to create yet another CIRA username!</b>" I'm persistent, but other members may not be.<br />
<br />
Apologies for this lengthy post, but it all seems relevant. I look forward to your further discussion – too bad this forum closes in 2 days. Feel free to contact me: mark@votermedia.org<br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<i>The lack of members at the CIRA forum reminds me of a UBC student union election event I attended in January 2006. They had reserved the campus movie theatre for this in-person forum (not online). I don't think I saw any student there besides the candidates and the event chairperson. I was a non-student curious about the election process. They looked at each other and said "What are we doing here?" So they unplugged their mike and speakers, and moved the forum into the lounge area outside the theatre, where quite a few students were hanging out in easy chairs, eating, chatting and maybe studying.<br />
<br />
Later that year I went to a student council meeting, and offered to sponsor a competition for reporters to cover their January 2007 election. That led to a multi-year implementation -- results described in the video <a href="http://votermedia.org/videos/3">How Votermedia Affects Election Campaigns</a> and the report <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/ExperimentsInVoterFundedMedia.pdf">Experiments in Voter Funded Media</a>.</i><br />
<br />
<i>As <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2015/09/ciraelection-why-im-voting-for-moll.html">I've done in past years</a>, I will soon post about who I'm voting for in the CIRA election and why. </i><br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-17663244039823511982016-09-06T11:13:00.000-07:002016-10-16T10:28:13.422-07:00How Canada Can Support Serious JournalismToday I submitted <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/2016-09-06-Latham-comments-on-Canadian-Journalism-Policy.pdf">this 3-page comment letter</a> <b>[<a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/Committee/421/CHPC/Brief/BR8497443/br-external/LathamMark-e.pdf">updated version 2016-10-04</a>]</b> with a policy proposal to let Canadian voters allocate public funding to competing journalist teams. This would support more public interest journalism such as election coverage and watching out for corruption in government. I recommend testing it in municipal politics before implementing it nationally. Canada's federal government has commissioned a study and report on this topic from the <a href="http://www.ppforum.ca/">Public Policy Forum</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Quote:</b><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>It's not that people don't understand the need for [public interest journalism]. We just need an incentive-compatible way to pay for it.</i></blockquote><br />
<b>Relevant links:</b><br />
<ul><li>2016-03-10 <a href="http://www.ppforum.ca/publications/does-serious-journalism-have-future-canada">Does serious journalism have a future in Canada?</a></li>
<li>2016-06-21 <a href="http://www.citynews.ca/2016/06/21/five-things-to-know-with-canadas-news-media-industry-under-public-policy-review/">Five things to know with Canada's news media industry under public policy review</a></li>
<li>2016-08-07 <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq2_wSsDwkQ">John Oliver (HBO) Last Week Tonight: Journalism</a></li>
<li>2016-08-08 Podcast interview: <a href="http://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/government-bail-news-business/">Should The Government Bail Out The News Business?</a></li>
<li>2016-09-01 <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/newspapers-canadian-heritage-public-policy-forum-digital-news-gathering-internet-1.3743580">Ottawa cuts newspaper ad spending amid worries about sector</a></li>
</ul><br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-39420426915833117712015-09-18T09:57:00.001-07:002015-09-22T14:22:31.872-07:00Revise the BC Credit Union Act to Reclaim Member DemocracyBritish Columbia's <a href="http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96082_01">Credit Union Incorporation Act</a> gets reviewed every 10 years, along with the <a href="http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/96141_00">Financial Institutions Act</a>. That time has come, so the <a href="http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/pld/fiareview.htm">review process</a> was launched on June 2, 2015.<br />
<br />
It's an important opportunity to improve credit union governance. On this blog I have advocated for reviving democratic member control, to reduce the risks and costs of self-serving behaviour by insiders -- credit union boards and their payees (senior staff, consultants etc) -- with <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/Coast%20Capital">Coast Capital</a> and <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/Vancity">Vancity</a> as specific examples.<br />
<br />
So I've submitted <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/2015-09-14-Latham-comments-on-FIA-CUIA-review.pdf">this comment letter</a> on the legislative review. My main recommendation is to require each credit union to host a year-round <b>online member forum</b> to facilitate member sharing of information -- mainly to reduce board control of voter info during director elections. See also <a href="http://www.brucebatchelor.com/FIAandCUIAreviewsubmission-Batchelor20150915v6.pdf">this comment letter by Bruce Batchelor</a>, who advocates a wider range of democratic reforms.<br />
<br />
As I highlighted in <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/MarkLathamCommentsOnFICOMDraftCUGovernanceGuideline.pdf">my similar comment letter to FICOM in 2013</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>It is natural for directors and their payees to say: "To improve governance, we should give more power to directors." But instead, we should strengthen our democratic checks and balances. Self-serving behaviour is natural for humans, as it is for foxes, so I mean no offence to either when I say: Please don't let the foxes design the hen house.</i></blockquote>
Fortunately, this time the <a href="http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/pld/files/FIA_Review_DM_Letter_to_Stakeholders.pdf">deputy minister has warned</a> that they "may" publish comment submissions on the Ministry of Finance website. That would be a great way of exposing insiders' recommendations to the sunlight of public scrutiny.<br />
<br />
Watch out for comments that advocate weakening credit union members' right to submit resolutions to a vote. There's a striking contrast between the BC Credit Union Act (<a href="http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96082_01#section77">Section 77</a>) and the <a href="http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_99028_01">BC Co-op Act</a>. The CU Act guarantees that with 300 member signatures, a resolution must be submitted to a vote of all members even if the board opposes it. The Co-op Act has no such guarantee.<br />
<br />
Then contrast what has happened with members' resolutions at Coast Capital CU versus at Mountain Equipment Co-op (<a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/MEC">MEC</a>). When Coast Capital members found out that their board had raised its own pay to more than double the Vancity CU board's pay, they put a resolution on the ballot and <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/05/reports-on-member-rebellion.html">passed it by a 79% majority</a>, against the board's advice to vote no. At MEC however, the board persuaded members to approve a <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/03/mec-vote-no-on-mountain-equipment-co-op.html">rules change "modernization"</a> that included (if you click through to read the details) letting the board reject any member resolution for any reason. The <i>existing</i> CU Act prevents boards from pulling that one.<br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-35422885999579781442015-09-16T15:57:00.000-07:002015-09-16T15:58:43.762-07:00#CIRAelection: Why I'm voting for Moll, Geist, Sandiford and maybe FinckelsteinThe Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) is holding its annual board election. I'm voting for these candidates:<br />
<blockquote>
<b>Members' Slate:<br />
- <a href="http://acei.ca/sites/default/files/documents/election/marita_moll-en.pdf">Marita Moll</a><br />
<br />
Nomination Committee Slate:<br />
- <a href="http://acei.ca/sites/default/files/documents/election/michael_geist_en.pdf">Michael Geist</a><br />
- <a href="http://acei.ca/sites/default/files/documents/election/bill_sandiford_en.pdf">Bill Sandiford</a><br />
- <a href="http://acei.ca/sites/default/files/documents/election/konrad_von_finkenstein_en.pdf">Konrad von Finckelstein</a> (maybe?)</b></blockquote>
If you're a CIRA member, you can <b><a href="https://participate.cira.ca/IVApp/Voting/voter_authentication.aspx?lng=en">vote Sept 16 - 23</a></b> (deadline: noon Pacific time Sept 23). You'll need your Voter ID and PIN from the email CIRA sent you today (Sept 16). Anyone with a .ca domain can join CIRA for free at <a href="http://cira.ca/membership">cira.ca/membership</a> and vote next year.<br />
<br />
<b>How I choose who to vote for:</b><br />
<br />
My research is not very deep, but there seems to be a lack of candidate assessments available online, so I'm trying to help fill that gap.<br />
<br />
I try to guess which candidates are more likely to advocate in the broad public interest, rather than for the interests of industry or themselves or their friends. I also look for some knowledge of internet issues, including privacy, technology, security, economics, business, politics etc.<br />
<br />
My sources include the candidates' statements and résumés (linked from <a href="http://cira.ca/election">cira.ca/election</a>), the <a href="http://forum.cira.ca/">election campaign forum</a>, perspectives from <a href="https://openmedia.ca/">OpenMedia.ca</a> (internet public interest advocacy organization), a former CIRA board member, and various others.<br />
<br />
I'm uncertain about my third choice on the nom-com slate. Konrad von Finckelstein is former chair of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Radio-television_and_Telecommunications_Commission">CRTC</a>, so has a wealth of relevant experience. Could he be too much of an insider? Hard to guess. Here are two perspectives on him, pro and con:<br />
<br />
Pro -- <a href="https://openmedia.ca/node/3548">openmedia.ca/node/3548</a><br />
<br />
Con -- <a href="http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/openmediaca/2014/07/has-crtc-really-changed-will-they-listen-to-canadians-or-telecom-">rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/openmediaca/2014/07/has-crtc-really-changed-will-they-listen-to-canadians-or-telecom-</a><br />
<br />
What do you think? Comments welcomed! <br />
<br />
<b>How to improve CIRA's election process:</b><br />
<br />
There is not enough voter engagement, nor enough sources of insightful assessments of the candidates. I have recommended various improvements to CIRA, so instead of repeating them I'll link to them:<br />
<br />
1. The latter half of <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2012/04/keep-canadas-internet-democratic-oppose.html">this blog post</a>.<br />
<br />
2. The paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/WeWantOurCo-opsBack.pdf">We Want Our Co-ops Back</a>.<br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-583025986385508002015-04-11T14:26:00.001-07:002015-09-18T07:41:19.402-07:00Who I'm voting for in Vancity Credit Union electionVancity Credit Union is having its annual election for board of directors. 3 seats are to be filled.<br />
<br />
<b>I'm voting for:</b><br />
<ul>
<li><b><a href="https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/GovernanceAndLeadership/Election/MeetThe2015Candidates/LisaBarrett/">Lisa Barrett</a></b></li>
<li><b><a href="https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/GovernanceAndLeadership/Election/MeetThe2015Candidates/ManKitKwan/">Man-kit Kwan</a></b></li>
<li><b><a href="https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/GovernanceAndLeadership/Election/MeetThe2015Candidates/VittoriaDeMichina/">Vittoria DeMichina</a></b></li>
</ul>
<b>Reasons:</b><br />
<ul>
<li>I haven't taken the time research the candidates in detail this year. If you know of any useful online reviews, please let me know.</li>
<li>I avoid the recommended candidates because recommendations entrench the controlling clique, as explained in <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/05/will-ficombc-support-vancity-credit.html">this earlier post</a>.</li>
<li>I have worked with <b>Lisa Barrett</b> on democratic reform, and think highly of her -- an easy first choice.</li>
<li>I like <b>Man-kit Kwan</b>'s straightforward emphasis on the community of members as owners.</li>
<li>I like <b>Vittoria DeMichina</b>'s personal history of pulling herself up by hard work.</li>
</ul>
<b>Other info:</b><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
New independent website -- <b><a href="http://vancity2015-collaborative-democracy.wikia.com/wiki/Vancity2015_Collaborative_Democracy_Wiki">Vancity2015 Collaborative Democracy Wiki</a></b> -- for sharing info on election candidates. Looks promising but still evolving towards being useful and convenient.</blockquote>
<b><a href="https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/GovernanceAndLeadership/Election/2015Election">Vote by April 24 on Vancity website</a></b><br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-54709616268651011772015-03-20T15:22:00.001-07:002019-02-13T13:52:06.323-08:00@MEC ramps up suppression of member #democracyIs Mountain Equipment "Co-op" still a co-op?<br />
<br />
Co-ops are democratic organizations controlled by their members (see <a href="https://www.mec.ca/AST/ContentPrimary/AboutMEC/AboutOurCoOp/StatementOfCoOperativeIdentity.jsp">fundamental principles of co-ops</a>). Look at the evidence that <b>MEC has become an undemocratic organization controlled by its entrenched board:</b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2012/04/mountain-equipment-co-op-agm-democracy.html">In 2012</a>, the board persuaded unsuspecting MEC members to give it the power to disqualify any member from running in board elections. Supposedly this was to improve the quality of candidates, but that excuse can easily be used to eliminate candidates that challenge the board.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/04/mec-slides-from-democracy-to-oligarchy.html">In 2013</a>, the board used that power to prevent former MEC board member Anders Ourom from running. It's notable that in 2015, when Anders did <i>not</i> put his name forward to run, board experience is now considered <a href="http://www.mec.ca/AST/ContentPrimary/AboutMEC/Governance/ElectionsandAGM/Nominations.jsp" target="_blank">sufficient to qualify</a>: "...the minimum qualifications (experience sitting on a board or ...)".<br />
<br />
<a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/04/mec-pretends-to-be-democracy-agm-report.html">In 2014</a>, 27 MEC members wanted to run in the board election. <a href="http://forums.clubtread.com/8-british-columbia-mainland/47109-mec-voting.html#post536229">The board blocked 2 of them</a>, and the board chair claimed that this power <i>increased</i> the board's accountability to members (on page 2 of <a href="http://www.mec.ca/media/Images/pdf/2014AGMDraftMinutes_v2_m56577569834572207.pdf">the minutes</a>).<br />
<br />
<i><b>This year, 23 MEC members wanted to run, and <a href="http://www.mec.ca/AST/ContentPrimary/AboutMEC/Governance/ElectionsandAGM/Nominations.jsp">the board blocked 7 of them</a>.</b></i><br />
<br />
As the notoriously corrupt <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_M._Tweed">Boss Tweed</a> used to say: <b>“I don't care who does the electing, so long as I get to do the nominating.”</b><br />
<br />
With such a censored ballot, it's no wonder that MEC's voter turnout remains below 1/10 of 1%. Russell Brand was right on target in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=1m37s" target="_blank">this video</a>: “It's not that I'm not voting out of apathy. I'm not voting out of absolute indifference and weariness and exhaustion from the lies, treachery, deceit of the political class”.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=1m37s" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9BsHaRdzwHo/VQyg22kutLI/AAAAAAAAV9Y/dLtIoXv2AaY/s400/Russell%2BBrand.png" /></a></div><br />
Of course, Russell was talking about UK national politics. But don't look to MEC for democratic governance.<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-34850081797495916232014-05-15T12:23:00.001-07:002014-05-15T12:25:09.384-07:00@Coast_Capital credit union members could set Board pay by median voteIn April 2013, Coast Capital Savings Credit Union members <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Corporate_Information/Governance/Board_Of_Directors/Ordinary_and_Special_Resolution/Members_Resolution/">approved by 79.7% majority a special resolution</a> that “...the members of Coast Capital establish the remuneration for the directors of the credit union...” The resolution, put forward by a group of members called <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/2013/04/30/the-results-on-the-vote-on-our-special-resolution-are-in-we-won/">Compensation Watch</a>, did not specify a process for members to do that.<br />
<br />
In April 2014, Compensation Watch and the Coast Capital Board put forward two duelling resolutions to specify how Board pay would be determined. However, neither resolution got the 2/3 member voting approval required for implementation. Details are in my previous blog post and in this <i>Victoria Times-Colonist</i> article: "<b><a href="http://www.timescolonist.com/business/credit-union-votes-fail-to-resolve-board-pay-dispute-1.1018111">Credit union votes fail to resolve board pay dispute</a></b>".<br />
<br />
So I am proposing another way that we Coast Capital members could determine our Board's pay: Vote using a menu of possible total Board pay pay levels, and set pay at the median voted amount. For example, we could submit it to member vote like this:<br />
<blockquote><i>How much should we Coast Capital members pay our Board, as annual total compensation?</i><br />
<blockquote>□ $200,000<br />
□ $300,000<br />
□ $400,000<br />
□ $500,000<br />
□ $600,000<br />
□ $700,000<br />
□ $800,000</blockquote></blockquote>I've fleshed out the proposal, with an example, in <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/SetBoardPayByMedianVote.pdf">this 3-page pdf</a>.<br />
<br />
I emailed it to the Board on May 8, and promptly got this reply: "Your email has been received and will be forwarded to the Board of Directors. Please expect a response in due course." No further response yet, but when it comes I'll post an update in this blog.<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-59778269594153282172014-05-02T09:19:00.001-07:002014-05-15T11:48:30.678-07:00@Coast_Capital vote results: Board oligarchy maintains its powerAt the Coast Capital Savings Credit Union Annual General Meeting on Wednesday April 30, results were announced for the member votes in the director election and on the 8 special resolutions. Unfortunately, none of the democratic reform candidates were elected, and the 4 member resolutions did not get the 2/3 vote required. The Board used its control of information sent to members, to maintain its grip on power for a while longer. On the plus side, the Board's 4 undemocratic resolutions also failed to get 2/3 voting approval. Details are in these links:<br />
<blockquote>- <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Corporate_Information/Governance/Board_Of_Directors/Directors_Election/2014_Special_Resolution_Election/2014_Election/Election_Results/">Director election results</a><br />
<br />
- <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Corporate_Information/Governance/Board_Of_Directors/Ordinary_and_Special_Resolution/Special_Resolution_2014/">Resolution vote results</a><br />
<br />
- Compensation Watch post: <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/2014/04/30/a-sad-day-for-democracy-at-coast-capital-savings-credit-union/">A sad day for democracy</a><br />
<br />
- Times-Colonist article: <a href="http://www.timescolonist.com/business/credit-union-votes-fail-to-resolve-board-pay-dispute-1.1018111">Credit union votes fail to resolve board pay dispute</a><br />
<br />
- <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Press_Advertising/News_Releases/May1,2014_Vote_Results/">Coast Capital news release</a><br />
<br />
- My previous summary post: <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">Vote for Member #Democracy @Coast_Capital Credit Union</a></blockquote>Coast Capital members will continue to work for democratic reform. I will still be involved, but perhaps not as vocal on this blog and twitter; so to hear what's going on, I recommend the <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/">Compensation Watch blog</a>. You can "Follow" them to get an email when they post something.<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-34607096467364540982014-04-27T18:47:00.000-07:002014-04-27T18:47:11.581-07:00Hear @Coast_Capital vote results at AGM Wed April 30<a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Corporate_Information/Governance/Annual_General_Meeting/">Coast Capital Savings Credit Union's Annual General Meeting</a> of members is this week:<br />
<blockquote><b>DATE:</b> Wednesday April 30.<br />
<br />
<b>TIME:</b> Registration & refreshments from 4:30pm. Meeting starts 5pm. Cutoff to register 5:15pm, but members can still enter the meeting.<br />
<br />
<b>PLACE:</b> Sheraton Guildford Hotel, 15269 – 104 Avenue, Surrey. Free parking for members attending AGM.<br />
<br />
<b>WEBCAST:</b> Live at <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Corporate_Information/Governance/Annual_General_Meeting/">this link</a>.</blockquote>It should be an exciting AGM this year, because we'll hear the results of the battle for the hearts and minds of Coast Capital members, between the incumbent Board and some challengers (whom I support). You can see what it's all about in <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">my March 16 blog post</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>See you there!</b><br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-9170017368776257152014-04-25T10:16:00.000-07:002016-10-13T13:26:26.870-07:00@MEC pretends to be a #democracy -- AGM report<b><a href="http://mec.ca">Mountain Equipment Cooperative</a></b> announced its director election results at the 2014 Annual General Meeting yesterday (April 24). While claiming to be improving the election process, the incumbent board now exercises great control over who gets elected. Not only do they put their candidate recommendations on the ballot, but they also <i>prevent some candidates from being on the ballot at all</i>.<br />
<br />
For this year's election to fill 4 director seats, the board <b>recommended these 8 candidates</b>:<br />
<blockquote>Ellen Pekeles<br />
Dale Mills<br />
Gord Howe<br />
Doug Brownridge<br />
Daniel Blanche<br />
Tamara Paton<br />
Jonathan Gallo<br />
Bill Gibson</blockquote>They also allowed onto the ballot these 6 candidates, whom they <b>did not recommend</b>:<br />
<blockquote>Jake Burlet<br />
Pat Maher<br />
Stephanie Bird<br />
Bob Brent<br />
Alex Beaskow<br />
Tom Webb</blockquote>These 4 were announced at the AGM as having been <b>elected</b>:<br />
<blockquote>Ellen Pekeles<br />
Tamara Paton<br />
Jonathan Gallo<br />
Daniel Blanche</blockquote>As you can see, only "recommended" candidates were elected. I've <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/05/will-ficombc-support-vancity-credit.html">documented elsewhere</a> how boards can and do use on-ballot recommendations to ensure that the only candidates who get elected are those that do not challenge the incumbent board. This reduces the board's accountability to members, which opens the door to corruption.<br />
<br />
The board chair claimed at the AGM that these recent election rule changes are "good governance" recommended by "experts". The "expert" he cited is often hired and paid by boards, and often gives advice to increase boards' power. I emphasized the obvious self-serving bias in a <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/MarkLathamCommentsOnFICOMDraftCUGovernanceGuideline.pdf">letter to FICOM</a>, the regulator for B.C. credit unions: It is natural for directors and their payees to say: "To improve governance, we should give more power to directors."<br />
<br />
But the MEC board has gone much further than the credit unions I wrote to FICOM about. <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/04/mec-slides-from-democracy-to-oligarchy.html">As we saw last year</a>, they used their new power to prevent a highly qualified candidate from even getting onto the ballot. So we only get to choose among candidates who don't rock their boat.<br />
<br />
I thank Melissa Fong for sharing <a href="https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#The_Common_Good_.281998.29">this quote from Noam Chomsky</a> in a <a href="https://twitter.com/internationalmf/status/457985810323611648">recent tweet</a>:<br />
<blockquote><b>"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."</b></blockquote>One of the <a href="https://www.mec.ca/AST/ContentPrimary/AboutMEC/AboutOurCoOp/StatementOfCoOperativeIdentity.jsp">fundamental principles of co-ops</a> is: "Co-operatives are democratic organizations controlled by their members". Which raises the question:<br />
<blockquote><b>Is MEC a co-op?</b></blockquote><br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-7057557914819638782014-03-16T16:56:00.000-07:002017-08-22T14:26:09.332-07:00Vote for Member #Democracy @Coast_Capital Credit Union<b>SUMMARY: [<a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/coast-capital-voting-advice.jpg">中文</a></b>]<br />
<br />
To control excess director pay and restore member democracy at Coast Capital Savings Credit Union, I recommend voting:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><b><span style="color: #990000;">AGAINST the Board's resolutions (numbered 1, 2, 3, 4)</span></b><br />
and<br />
<span style="color: #38761d;"><b>FOR the member resolutions (numbered 5, 6, 7, 8)</b></span></blockquote>(<a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/Resources/Documents/OnlineVoting/SR_Booklet_SPg_WEB.pdf">Resolutions booklet here</a>.) In the director election I recommend voting for three candidates <i>not</i> recommended by the Board. I'm voting for <b><a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/SharedContent/OnlineVoting/ShortBio/2014/lisa_barrett.pdf">Lisa Barrett</a>, <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/SharedContent/OnlineVoting/ShortBio/2014/bruce_batchelor.pdf">Bruce Batchelor</a> and <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/SharedContent/OnlineVoting/ShortBio/2014/john_fryer.pdf">John Fryer</a></b>.<br />
<br />
<b>Vote now through April 8:</b> You can fill in the paper ballot and submit it at any branch. Or vote online at <a href="https://coastcapitalsavings.com/">coastcapitalsavings.com</a>: log in, then click <b>Online Voting</b> tab at lower left. (Joint account members and business members can't vote online, so must use the paper ballots.)<br />
<br />
<b>Please spread the word</b> to your friends who may be among Coast Capital's 500,000 members in southwestern British Columbia.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4uOAlWvxFC4/Uy3RmWpoGxI/AAAAAAAAOqw/-QloOYG7t74/s1600/2014+Ballot+voted.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4uOAlWvxFC4/Uy3RmWpoGxI/AAAAAAAAOqw/-QloOYG7t74/s640/2014+Ballot+voted.jpg" /></a></div><b>REASONS:</b><br />
<br />
In 2007, the Board persuaded members to let the Board set its own pay based on a pay "philosophy" document. By 2011, the Board had raised its pay to more than double that of Vancity Credit Union's Board -- <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/director-pay-in-2011/">details here</a>. (Vancity is similar to Coast Capital in size and location. Both have about 500,000 members.)<br />
<br />
Members were unaware of this dramatic rise in director pay, until in 2013 two members created the <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/">Coast Capital Compensation Watch</a> website, and gathered over 400 member signatures to put this resolution on the ballot:<br />
<blockquote>"Be it resolved that, the members of Coast Capital Savings Credit Union establish the remuneration for the Directors of the credit union and that the amount paid to each Director is published in the Annual Report."</blockquote>The Board put the member resolution and its supporting statement on pages 10 and 11 of <a href="https://governancewatch.ca/2014%20Special%20Resolutions%20Booklet%20-%20Annotated.pdf">this 12-page booklet</a>, most of which was designed to persuade members to vote against the resolution. Examples of the Board's spin:<br />
<blockquote><b>Page 5:</b> <i><span style="color: #990000;">"...you are being asked to vote on a special resolution brought forward by a member named Phil Embley..."</span></i><br />
-- No mention of the over 400 members who signed petitions in support of bringing the resolution to members' vote.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 5:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"...every three years the Board Governance Committee works with an independent external compensation consultant who reviews director compensation..."</i></span><br />
-- Of course, the "independent" consultant is selected by the Board.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 8:</b> <i><span style="color: #990000;">"Coast Capital advises our members that some of the facts alleged in the [resolution's supporting] statement are inaccurate and misleading."</span></i><br />
-- They gave no specific backup to this accusation, in spite of the many pages of their arguments in the booklet where they could have done so.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 9:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"Vote “Against” if you agree with the 2007 member-approved approach to establishing director compensation"</i></span></blockquote>Fortunately, members were able to see through the Board's spin, and <b><a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Press_Advertising/News_Releases/May1,2013/">voted 79.7% in favour of the member resolution</a></b>! Voter turnout in 2013 set a new record of over 23,000 compared with less than 14,000 in 2012 and less than 20,000 in 2011.<br />
<br />
Recognizing that excess pay indicated a <b>lack of Board accountability</b> to members, a group of concerned members (including me) worked with Phil and Scott at Compensation Watch to review Coast Capital's governance rules. We were dismayed to learn how the Board had written the director election rules to give themselves effective control of who gets elected, while maintaining a facade of democracy: They put their chosen candidates first on the ballot (in bold face, flagged as "recommended"), and <b>prohibit campaigning</b>. Candidates are not allowed to mention their candidacy on the web or by email or in the media, else they will be disqualified -- see <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/2014-campaign-regulations.pdf">2014 Campaign Regulations</a> (especially rules 4, 5, 6, 7). For data and analysis of how recommendations on a ballot affect elections, see my <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/MarkLathamCommentsOnFICOMDraftCUGovernanceGuideline.pdf">letter to the B.C. Financial Institutions Commission</a>.<br />
<br />
So we drafted four resolutions to help re-establish member democracy:<br />
<ul><li><b>12-year director term limit.</b></li>
<b> </b>
<li><b>Disclose pay of top 3 executives.</b></li>
<b> </b>
<li><b>Allow director election campaigning.</b></li>
<b> </b>
<li><b>Set specific pay for directors, at Vancity's pay levels.</b></li>
</ul>Several of us also offered to run for election to the Board, even though in 2014 we would still be subject to the ban on campaigning.<br />
<br />
As in 2013, we had to gather signatures from at least 300 members to get these resolutions on the ballot. We got over 400 signatures on each. Here's a photo of me helping deliver them on January 24:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xVqsAkPvAxY/UyXxxWt9rMI/AAAAAAAAOoc/HwBLXJVJXR8/s1600/Mark+Delivering+Petitions+to+Coast+Capital.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xVqsAkPvAxY/UyXxxWt9rMI/AAAAAAAAOoc/HwBLXJVJXR8/s1600/Mark+Delivering+Petitions+to+Coast+Capital.jpg" height="265" width="400" /></a></div><br />
<br />
This year, the Board realized it would take more than spin to sway member votes their way, so they drafted <b>four resolutions with the same headings as our four</b>, and placed them ahead of ours on the ballot. Again, they drafted the member voting information booklet with many pages of their spin. Here's a <a href="https://governancewatch.ca/2014%20Special%20Resolutions%20Booklet%20-%20Annotated.pdf">link to the booklet</a> and some rebuttal to their arguments:<br />
<br />
<b>Page 3:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"Four individuals are bringing forward disruptive Special Resolutions ... which will threaten our great products and services."</i></span><br />
-- All four of <b>our resolutions are already in effect</b> at successful financial institutions. Vancity's pay levels attract well qualified directors, who run for election with campaigning allowed. 12-year term limits are a well accepted practice, as is disclosure of executive pay. Each resolution is well supported by the statements on pages 6, 8, 10 and 12 of <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/Resources/Documents/OnlineVoting/SR_Booklet_SPg_WEB.pdf">the booklet</a>. On the contrary, a <b>lack of accountability</b> can threaten the success of a financial institution, as the 2008 financial crisis showed us, so we should strengthen accountability of Coast Capital's Board to us, the members. Similarly, a <a href="http://www.thenews.coop/70356/news/consumer/co-operative-group-needs-enhance-connections-eight-million-members-says-lord-myners/">"<b>democratic deficit</b>" in the UK Co-operative Group</a> was a causal factor in their <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative_Group#2013_scandal">2013 scandal</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 3:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"These individuals are aligned with a small special interest group known as Coast Capital Compensation Watch. Their name is misleading. This group is not the voice of your credit union. It represents the views of only a few supporters – not Coast Capital’s 512,000 members."</i></span><br />
-- <b><a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/About_Coast_Capital_Savings/Press_Advertising/News_Releases/May1,2013/">79.7% of voting members</a></b> said that last year's Compensation Watch resolution represented their views better than the arguments of a small group known as Coast Capital's Board. That small group seems to have a special interest in increasing its pay and its grip on power. More members voted for the 2013 Comp Watch resolution than ever voted to elect any of the current directors.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 5:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"The Individual Resolutions are unnecessary and costly."</i></span><br />
-- These resolutions were made necessary by the Board's unreasonable pay increases and unfair election rules. Compare 2011 Vancity Board pay of $366,000 to <b>Coast Capital Board pay of $750,000</b> and other comparisons <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts/">here</a>. Also, the resolution proponents have taken care to time their submissions to coincide with director elections, so as not to require a costly extra mailing to all members.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 7:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"We're already implementing term limits this year."</i></span><br />
-- The Board's Term Limit resolution was drafted <b><i>after</i></b> the members' Term Limit resolution, in response to it, so there's no <i>"already"</i> about it. It even refers to the members' resolution, giving itself the power to override if both are passed. How can they even be allowed to put their resolution first on the ballot? And the Board's resolution would ignore the 20-plus years that two directors have already served: <i><span style="color: #990000;">"... only an individual’s years of service as a Director of the Credit Union beginning on or after April 30, 2014 will be counted..."</span> (page 16)</i> So those two directors would have served at least <b>32 years each</b> before their "12 year limit" resolution would term them out!<br />
<br />
<b>Page 9:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"We already do this."</i></span><br />
-- The members' resolution calls for disclosing the top three executives' pay individually, to the extent permissible by law. Coast Capital is only disclosing the <b>sum</b> of the top <b>nine</b> executives' pay, which <b>hides information</b> by lumping it together, as explained in the supporting statement on page 8 of <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/Resources/Documents/OnlineVoting/SR_Booklet_SPg_WEB.pdf">the booklet</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 11:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"Keep our elections democratic."</i></span><br />
-- It amazes me that anyone could consider it democratic to <b>silence election candidates</b> and control voter information as tightly as this Board now does -- see <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/2014-campaign-regulations.pdf">2014 Campaign Regulations</a> (especially rules 4, 5, 6, 7). Even the organizations I criticized in the paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/WeWantOurCo-opsBack.pdf">We Want Our Co-ops Back</a> do not silence candidates as Coast Capital does.<br />
<br />
<b>Page 13:</b> <span style="color: #990000;"><i>"Your Board also commissioned an independent member task force to review the credit union’s philosophy that sets Director pay."</i></span><br />
-- The Compensation Task Force process was orchestrated by another "independent" consultant chosen by the Board and Board-overseen staff. It concluded by proposing another pay "philosophy" that would <b>continue to give the Board leeway in setting its own pay</b> -- more on that at <a href="https://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/2014/02/16/task-force-magic/">this Comp Watch page</a>.<br />
<br />
<i>[About the author of this post: Mark Latham is a Vancouver-based financial economist (cv: <a href="https://linkedin.com/in/marklatham">linkedin.com/in/marklatham</a>) specializing in governance reform of co-ops, democracies and corporations. He was appointed by the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to represent individual investors on the SEC’s post-financial-crisis <a href="https://votermedia.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/seciac-members-subcommittees-constituencies/">Investor Advisory Committee</a>.]</i><br />
<br />
<i>[Last updated on 2014-04-06.]</i><br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-45308249688681530412014-03-12T13:39:00.000-07:002014-03-16T17:06:22.154-07:00Vote for #Accountability @Coast_Capital Savings Credit UnionThis post has been superseded by <b><a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">a subsequent post</a></b> which includes more recent info, so I recommend <b><a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2014/03/vote-for-member-democracy-coastcapital.html">reading that instead</a></b>.<br />
<br />
But if you would like to read this older post, it continues below:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: #38761d;"><b>Flash update -- ballot published Friday March 14:</b></span></i><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="color: #38761d;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">The Coast Capital Board has inserted its own four resolutions onto the ballot ahead of the four member resolutions. They mimic the member resolutions but water them down greatly. I recommend voting</span> <b><span style="color: #990000;">AGAINST the Board's resolutions (numbered 1, 2, 3, 4)</span></b> <span style="color: #0b5394;">and</span> <b>FOR the member resolutions (numbered 5, 6, 7, 8)</b>.</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d;"><br />
</span> <span style="color: #0b5394;">Director election: I recommend voting for three candidates not recommended by the Board. (I plan to vote for <b><span style="color: #38761d;">Lisa Barrett, Bruce Batchelor and John Fryer</span></b>.)<br />
<br />
To vote, go to <a href="http://coastcapitalsavings.com/">coastcapitalsavings.com</a>, log in, then click <b>Online Voting</b> tab at lower left.</span></blockquote>
<br />
<b>Member rebellion over director pay leads to democratic reform proposals and contested election.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cgbYh6uesTE/UyDAJnDp1iI/AAAAAAAAOoE/4BOO_G572wc/s2400/Mark+Delivering+Petitions+to+Coast+Capital.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cgbYh6uesTE/UyDAJnDp1iI/AAAAAAAAOoE/4BOO_G572wc/s320/Mark+Delivering+Petitions+to+Coast+Capital.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Delivering four resolutions signed by over 400 members, which required Coast Capital’s Board to bring them to a vote of all members, starting March 14.</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The upcoming director election and referenda at Coast Capital are a great opportunity for members to stand up for democratic accountability of our elected leaders. The outcome can affect the future of not only Coast Capital, but also other credit unions, co-ops, democracies and corporations.<br />
<br />
From March 14 through April 8, Coast Capital members will be voting to <b>elect three directors</b>, and to approve or disapprove these <b>four member-proposed resolutions:</b><br />
<blockquote>
<b>5. <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-3-for-2014-set-term-limits-for-directors/">Set 12 Year Term Limit for Directors</a></b><br />
<b>6. <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-2-for-2014-executive-pay-disclosure/">Disclose Pay of Top 3 Executives</a></b><br />
<b>7. <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-4-for-2014-enabling-members-to-make-an-informed-choice/">Reform Director Election Processes</a></b><br />
<b>8. <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-1-for-2014-set-specific-pay-for-directors/">Set Specific Pay for Directors</a></b></blockquote>
(The links above lead to explanations and full text of resolutions on the <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/">Coast Capital Compensation Watch</a> website. I renumbered them on March 14 to match the ballot now published.)<br />
<br />
The proponents consulted with many Coast Capital members (including me) when drafting these resolutions. Each proposal is already supported by more than 400 member signatures, which exceeds the 300 legally required to get on the ballot.<br />
<br />
I recommend voting <b>for</b> the above four resolutions, and for three director candidates <i>other than those recommended by the current Board</i>. (I plan to vote for Lisa Barrett, Bruce Batchelor and John Fryer.) Here’s why:<br />
<br />
I’m a financial economist (cv: <a href="http://linkedin.com/in/marklatham">linkedin.com/in/marklatham</a>) specializing in governance reform of co-ops, democracies and corporations. I find that the same lack of accountability causes similar problems in all these organizations. Voters find it difficult to monitor elected leaders, leaders prefer it that way, and don’t encourage the development of independent sources of voter information. Rather, they try to control the information conveniently available to voters, to ensure it is favourable to themselves.<br />
<br />
From a <a href="http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was-most-successful-political-idea-20th-century-why-has-it-run-trouble-and-what-can-be-do">recent essay</a> in <b><i>The Economist</i></b> reviewing democracy around the world: “Many nominal democracies have slid towards autocracy, maintaining the outward appearance of democracy through elections, but without the rights and institutions that are equally important aspects of a functioning democratic system.” “...the first sign that a fledgling democracy is heading for the rocks often comes when elected rulers try to erode constraints on their power...”<br />
<br />
We voters need to ensure that our elected leaders are accountable to us. If we don’t, we risk more of the same hidden malfeasance that brought us the 2008 financial crisis. Excess pay is the most obvious abuse of power, but merely the tip of the iceberg. There are many ways to game the system, and many “experts” for hire to help find new ways.<br />
<br />
The Coast Capital Board has been gaming the system by putting their director candidate recommendations on the election ballot, and preventing candidates from campaigning to members. That kind of election influence and information control let them think they could get away with raising their own pay to over double that of Vancity Credit Union’s Board. Last year one member brought this to the attention of all members by collecting enough signatures to put a resolution on the 2013 ballot, to <b>restore member control of director pay</b>. Against Board opposition, this was approved by an impressive 79.7% majority. The full story is on the <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/">Coast Capital Compensation Watch</a> website.<br />
<br />
Since then, the Board has tried to direct the process by which members can determine their pay -- see <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/2014/02/16/task-force-magic/">Task Force Magic</a>. That is why more specific reforms are needed this year: the four member resolutions, and electing new directors to the Board who are independent of the incumbents.<br />
<br />
I raised most of these issues with the B.C. Financial Institutions Commission (FICOM) in a <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/05/will-ficombc-support-vancity-credit.html">comment letter</a> last year, but we credit union members need not wait for them. We can start democratic reform at Coast Capital, then spread it to other credit unions, co-ops, democracies and corporations as outlined in two articles entitled “<b>We Want Our Co-ops Back</b>”, at <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications">votermedia.org/publications</a>.<br />
<br />
Please spread the word, especially around Victoria, Richmond, Surrey and the lower Fraser Valley where many branches are located. There are half a million members, and most tend not to vote. But if they hear about this, many will step up and vote for reform. When the Coast Capital ballot is published on March 14, I will post updated information at <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/">votermedia.blogspot.ca</a>. Comments welcomed below, by email to mark@votermedia.org or tweet to <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=votermedia&f=realtime">@votermedia</a>.<br />
<br />
<i>Mark Latham is an independent financial economist, Founder of <a href="http://votermedia.org/">Votermedia.org</a> and a Director of <a href="http://proxydemocracy.org/">ProxyDemocracy.org</a>. He was appointed by the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to represent individual investors on the SEC’s post-financial-crisis <a href="http://votermedia.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/seciac-members-subcommittees-constituencies/">Investor Advisory Committee</a>.</i><br />
<br />Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-9766256589559656902014-02-13T11:02:00.000-08:002014-04-24T09:37:41.747-07:00@Liberal_Party of #Canada Members' Voice Proposal #LPCI’d appreciate your feedback on this 5-page draft: <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/LPCMembersVoiceProposal.pdf">LPC Members' Voice Proposal</a><br />
<br />
(Party members can comment on <a href="http://www.liberal.ca/community/mark-latham/activity/36426/">my post at liberal.ca</a>. Anyone is welcome to comment on this blog or by email to mark[at]votermedia.org.)<br />
<br />
<b>Summary –</b><br />
<blockquote>- Here is something the LPC can do now to help win the 2015 election, by uniting Party members nationally in developing and supporting a consensus platform, while showing Canadians a credible commitment to democratic reform and accountability.<br />
<br />
- <b>Proposal:</b> Let LPC members vote at liberal.ca to allocate $20 per day among competing Liberal blogs.<br />
<br />
- A similar blog funding competition at UBC’s student union helped engage, inform and connect members with elected leaders — see video <a href="http://votermedia.org/videos/2">Votermedia at UBC</a><br />
<br />
- This LPC blog competition can help generate ideas for future Liberal government policy. For example, nationwide voter funded media could engage and inform voters, broaden policy debate, enhance government accountability and reduce corruption.</blockquote>My background: I’m a financial economist (cv: <a href="http://linkedin.com/in/marklatham">linkedin.com/in/marklatham</a>) specializing in reform of democracies and corporations by improving voter information systems. This proposal would help increase engagement by members and voters, but its main goal is to ensure that those who do participate are better informed. The combination of funding plus voting by LPC members would generate new content on the top-voted blogs, and recognition by the LPC community that this content represents a broad consensus of members.<br />
<br />
This follows up on my Dec 29 post on this blog: <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/2013/12/why-i-joined-liberalparty-of-canada-lpc.html">Why I joined the Liberal Party of Canada</a>.<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-78601922295825110142014-01-29T09:45:00.000-08:002014-01-29T09:45:37.185-08:00@Coast_Capital Credit Union: 4 member resolutions go to vote in March @Comp_WatchOver 400 members of <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/">Coast Capital Savings Credit Union</a> signed petitions to require a member vote on <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/all-4-resolution-petitions-in-one-v3.pdf">these four resolutions</a>:<br />
<ol><li><a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-1-for-2014-set-specific-pay-for-directors/">Set Specific Pay for Directors</a></li>
<li><a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-2-for-2014-executive-pay-disclosure/">Disclose Pay of Top 3 Executives</a></li>
<li><a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-3-for-2014-set-term-limits-for-directors/">Set 12 Year Term Limit for Directors</a></li>
<li><a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/new-coast-capital-savings-member-resolutions-for-2014/special-resolution-4-for-2014-enabling-members-to-make-an-informed-choice/">Reform Director Election Processes</a></li>
</ol>This surpasses the 300 signatures needed to have a vote of all Coast Capital members on the resolutions, on the election ballot March 14 - April 8.<br />
<br />
A big thank-you to Phil Embley and Scott Kristjanson at Coast Capital Compensation Watch for spearheading this drive to reform our credit union! I joined Scott at Coast HQ to submit the signatures, so he posted my smiling face on the <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.com/2014/01/28/we-have-reached-our-goal-of-300-signatures-for-our-petitions-coast-capital-savings-compensation-watch-special-resolutions-2014-petitions/">Comp Watch website announcement here</a>.<br />
<br />
<b><i>Members please vote YES on these resolutions March 14 - April 8!</i></b><br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-83577137850517715652014-01-20T09:00:00.000-08:002017-03-20T09:45:03.971-07:00@Coast_Capital members please sign these #democracy reform resolutions @Comp_WatchThis is the last week for <a href="https://www.coastcapitalsavings.com/">Coast Capital Savings Credit Union</a> members to sign these 4 resolutions for restoring the board's accountability. We need 300 signatures to get them onto the March 2014 ballot, so that all members can vote on them. We have over 200, so getting close.<br />
<br />
This is important because the Coast Capital board has been taking advantage of its power to overpay itself with members' funds. In 2011 <i><b>they paid themselves more than double the pay of Vancity Credit Union's board</b></i> -- details at <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts/">coastcapitalcompensationwatch.wordpress.com/facts</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Members: Please print, sign, and return:<br />
</b><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><b> <a href="http://coastcapitalcompensationwatch.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/all-4-resolution-petitions-in-one-v3.pdf">ALL 4 RESOLUTIONS IN THIS PDF FILE</a></b></blockquote><br />
You can scan (or photograph) your signed resolutions and email them to compensationwatch@gmail.com, or fax to 604-542-9369, or mail to address on the form.<br />
<br />
Please forward this to friends in Metro Vancouver and Vancouver Island who may be members. Thank you!<br />
<br />
Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-29310873896916666942014-01-04T12:14:00.000-08:002014-01-04T12:14:48.150-08:00@modo_carcoop: Vote now to elect 3 directors; but there's no online campaign forumVancouver's <a href="http://modo.coop/">Modo The Car Co-op</a> members are voting in the annual election of directors from January 4 through January 22. We will choose 3 of these 5 candidates:<br />
<ul><li>Aaron Burns</li>
<li>Arpal Dosanjh</li>
<li>Joel DeYoung</li>
<li>Simon Abou-Attoun</li>
<li>William Azaroff</li>
</ul>I thank all five for offering to serve as directors of our co-op!<br />
<br />
This year, Modo has launched <b>online voting</b> for the first time, an important step forward now that we have grown beyond 9,000 members. Each candidate has written a few paragraphs about themselves, and made a 2-minute video -- see <a href="http://www.modo.coop/modo-board-of-directors-2014-nominees-and-voting">www.modo.coop/modo-board-of-directors-2014-nominees-and-voting</a> <br />
<br />
It's great that busy members need not attend the AGM to vote, and we now have time for informed comparison of candidates. Unfortunately, there's not enough online support for informed comparison of candidates. We should have a <b>campaign forum</b>, linked from the election page, where members can ask candidates questions and discuss their answers. For example, see the <a href="https://elections.cira.ca/2013/campaign/topics/en">director election campaign forum</a> at Canadian Internet Registration Authority. <br />
<br />
How about setting that up for next year?<br />
<br />
The Modo AGM on January 22 should be fun. <a href="https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/modo-agm-co-op-fair-after-party-2014-tickets-9911509592">Free registration</a>; all are welcome; only members can vote:<br />
<ul><li>Co-op Fair 6-7pm: Meet other local co-ops (500 Granville St)</li>
<li>AGM 7-9pm: Complete the director election process (500 Granville St)</li>
<li>After-Party 8:30pm-midnight: Enjoy! (200 - 470 Granville St)</li>
</ul>Related links FYI:<br />
<ul><li>my <a href="http://votermedia.blogspot.ca/search/label/Modo">previous posts about Modo</a></li>
<li>ideas for improving member democracy: <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/WeWantOurCo-opsBack.pdf">We Want Our Co-ops Back</a></li>
</ul>Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6115556433372076865.post-32620236632648131482013-12-29T16:10:00.000-08:002013-12-29T16:10:03.306-08:00Why I joined the @Liberal_Party of #Canada #LPC<b>I'm a swing voter.</b> At various times, I have voted Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and Green. We swing voters keep politicians on their toes, competing with each other to serve the public interest (or at least to present themselves that way). No party can take our votes for granted.<br />
<br />
So I had never joined a political party in my life. Until this year. <b>Why the change?</b><br />
<br />
Democratic competition is essential for making elected leaders accountable to voters. But even though our political systems feature electoral competition, that doesn't seem effective enough to keep our leaders and governments loyal to the public interest. <b>Corruption</b> of varying degrees seems pervasive and persistent, from the Liberals' <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal">sponsorship scandal</a> ten years ago to the Conservatives' <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Senate_expenses_scandal">senate expenses scandal</a> now.<br />
<br />
Solving this problem has been my main occupation for the past 17 years, focusing first on corporations (where shareowners elect directors), then broadening to include democracies. As a <a href="http://linkedin.com/in/marklatham">financial economist</a>, my main contribution is to design a system for voters to pay information providers (such as journalists), creating stronger incentives for journalists to serve the interests of a voter community. Successful tests of this system are reported in the paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/ExperimentsInVoterFundedMedia.pdf">Experiments in Voter Funded Media</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Designing a solution is one thing. Getting it implemented is quite another.</b> Those in power are naturally reluctant to shift power from themselves to voters (which is what happens when voters become better informed). So it is difficult to change the system from the outside.<br />
<br />
When a friend whom I respect asked me to help him run for election as a Liberal member of Canada's parliament, I soon agreed to do so, but did not commit to any specific type of help. It was only later, as I tried to understand the current dynamics of Canadian federal politics, that I saw a potential alignment of my public interest reform work with joining the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) myself.<br />
<br />
To regain Canadian voters' trust after the sponsorship scandal, the LPC needs to show they (we) are serious about reducing corruption and strengthening accountability. We also need to propose some innovative policy ideas to distinguish ourselves from the other parties (e.g. see <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/bc-likes-trudeau-but-hell-have-to-up-his-game/article16057802">this perspective in the <i>Globe & Mail</i></a>). A new internet-based voter information and engagement strategy could help fulfill these needs.<br />
<br />
There are other reasons why the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Party_of_Canada">centrist LPC</a> may fit my political orientation better than other parties. I was fortunate to grow up in a home where both my parents cared about politics and public policy. Best of all was their wide range of views, since <b>Mom was NDP while Dad was Conservative</b>. (And they stayed married for life!) I learned to appreciate that there are intelligent people in all our major political parties who are sincerely trying to serve the public interest. I see them all as colleagues in that endeavour.<br />
<br />
The issue of democratic accountability can appeal to voters across the political spectrum. A centrist party may be in the best position to attract swing voters from other parties by taking the lead on such an issue.<br />
<br />
Of course, voters and party members must try to ensure that an elected party actually delivers on its campaign platform. Backsliding has long been the norm:<br />
<blockquote>"As soon as the new leaders have attained their ends, as soon as they have succeeded (in the name of the injured rights of the anonymous masses) in overthrowing the odious tyranny of their predecessors and in attaining to power in their turn, we see them undergo a transformation which renders them in every respect similar to the dethroned tyrants. Such metamorphoses as these are plainly recorded throughout history." (<a href="http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/michels/polipart.pdf">Michels</a> [1911] p. 114)</blockquote>When I quoted the above passage last year in a paper <a href="http://votermedia.org/publications/WeWantOurCo-opsBack.pdf">We Want Our Co-ops Back</a> (p. 11), I added:<br />
<blockquote>"Therefore in addition to supporting challengers, it is even more important to change a co-op's rules in ways that strengthen a competitive democracy, and reduce the entrenchment of the current leaders. Ideally, we members would like to elect directors that will help implement such reforms. So we should push candidates toward platforms that include reform, and hold them accountable to their promises."</blockquote>As <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig">Lawrence Lessig</a> said eloquently in his <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.html">February 2013 TED talk</a> (about 11 minutes in): <b>It's not that democratic reform is the most important issue. But it's the first issue</b> -- the one we need to solve in order to solve the more important issues like environmental policy. Although money-driven corruption is not as bad in Canada as in the USA, the power of well-funded narrow interests to misinform voters and influence politicians is a big problem here too.<br />
<br />
So I'm heading for the <a href="http://convention.liberal.ca/">LPC Biennial Policy Convention</a> in Montreal, February 20-23, 2014.<br />
<br />
BTW Canadians get tax credits for federal political donations. Your first $400 donated per calendar year <a href="http://www.livewelldogood.com/political-contributions-top-tax-tips.php">only costs you $100</a>. You can do this once by December 31, and then again in January -- donate to LPC at <a href="http://liberal.ca/donate">liberal.ca/donate</a> or call (888) 542-3725.<br />
<br>Mark Lathamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05570922352903867246noreply@blogger.com0