Chad Skelton, Reporter The Vancouver Sun 1-200 Granville St. Vancouver, B.C. V6C 3N3 604-605-2892 [email protected] Oct. 26, 2010 Jason Eamer-Goult FOI Coordinator BC Ferries [email protected] Mr. Eamer-Goult: I am writing you in response to two letter dated Oct.21 you sent me assessing fees in relation to Freedom of Information requests I made to BC Ferries. Specifically, $75.26 for 2010-006 and $112.90 or 2010- 008. I have attached both fee estimate letters to this email as a PDF. Both requests deal with how BC Ferries plans to deal with Freedom of Information requests. The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants. Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24: STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest? (a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
BC Ferries Fee Waiver Letters
Nov 21, 2014
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Oct. 26, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to two letter dated Oct.21 you sent me assessing fees in relation to Freedom of Information requests I made to BC Ferries. Specifically, $75.26 for 2010-006 and $112.90 or 2010-008. I have attached both fee estimate letters to this email as a PDF. Both requests deal with how BC Ferries plans to deal with Freedom of Information requests.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
BC Ferries coming back under Freedom of Information legislation for the first time since 2003 has been a subject of media coverage since the government announced it over the summer. Specifically, BC Ferries’ unusual policy of publishing all records released under FOI — and its hard line on fees — has received extensive media attention. The Vancouver Sun ran a full-page article on the issue in its Oct. 1 edition (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/BC-ferries-investigation/index.html) and has covered the issue extensively since on its Paper Trail blog (http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/papertrail/archive/tags/bcferries/default.aspx). But The Sun is far from the only media outlet that has covered the controversy over BC Ferries’approach to FOI requests.
The controversy has been covered by the Nanaimo Daily News (http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=79a053a2-f44e-4613-bbce-9ef4e8f1b367), CKNW’s Bill Good show on Oct. 1 (accessible through CKNW’s audio vault at http://www.cknw.com/other/audiovault.html ) and Public Eye Radio on CFAX on Oct. 10 (http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005333.html).
All of the coverage has questioned whether BC Ferries’ stated reason for imposing the policy — increased transparency — is correct or whether the ferry corporation is actually trying to discourage requesters, particularly media requesters, by posting information on FOI requests online. The emails and other correspondence requested in these two FOI requests may help to answer those questions.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
Transparency is a fundamental value of good governance. The records in question will shed light on whether BC Ferries is truly committed to openness or if it trying to frustrate requesters and make itself less accountable to the public.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
Government transparency is an important issue and these records will shed light on how the FOI legislation is administered by a corporation that has not been subject to FOI requests for many years.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Oct. 26, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to two letters dated Oct.21 you sent me assessing fees in relation to Freedom of Information requests I made to BC Ferries. Specifically, $439.04 for 2010-009 and $188.16 for 2010-10. I have attached both fee estimate letters to this email as a PDF. Both requests deal with how BC Ferries planned to deal with an increase in traffic during the 2010 Olympics and any reports produced on how the ferry corporation actually dealt with the increased traffic.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
On Feb. 23, 2010, the Times-Colonist ran a front page story titled “B.C. Ferries swamped by Games crush” (http://www.timescolonist.com/entertainment/celebrity/Ferries+swamped+Games+crush/2599472/story.html?id=2599472) which stated that the ferry corporation was not well prepared for the influx of passengers heading to the Olympics and that 600 walk-on passengers were left behind on the 9 a.m. sailing between Swartz Bay and Tsawwassen. The online version of the story received 86 comments, which suggests a high level of public interest in the issue. BC Ferries CEO David Hahn also said the ferry corporation would learn from the incident.
The records I’m requesting specifically address how well (or ill) prepared BC Ferries was for the increase in traffic during the Olympics and what, if anything, it has learned from the incident.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
BC Ferries service is a lifeline for many coastal communities. When passengers are left behind because of poor planning during major events, the public is negatively affected.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records would help the public understand what steps BC Ferries has taken to reduce severe delays during major events.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Oct. 26, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.21 in which you assessed me a fee of $338.69 for my request 2010-013 in which I asked for records relating to how BC Ferries planned to respond to the comptroller-general’s report. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
Comptroller-general Cheryl Wenezenki-Yolland’s report into BC Ferries and TransLink received extensive media attention when it was released in November 2009. The Times-Colonist ran a front-page story on Nov. 7, 2009 titled, “Ferry executives paid too much: comptroller general”. Three days later, in another front-page article in the Times-Colonist, titled “Ferries boss dismisses report as ‘nonsense’”, BC Ferries CEO David Hahn criticized Wenezenki-Yolland’s report. The report, and BC Ferries’ reaction to it, was also covered extensively in The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Province+introduces+legislation+salaries+Ferries+executives/2967245/story.html), The Province (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Million+dollar+Ferries+boss+says+overpaid/2204048/story.html), The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-ferries-ceo-defends-his-1-million-salary/article1357348/) and CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/11/09/bc-bc-ferries-hahn-harrison.html). At least one of the online stories received more than 100 comments, suggesting the issue of the report, and Hahn’s pay, is of intense public interest. How BC Ferries planned internally to respond to the report would shed light on how the ferry corporation dealt with the report and its findings.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
BC Ferries is heavily subsidized by taxpayers so Hahn’s pay, and the comptroller-general’s report into it, is of intense public interest. The records requested will reveal how BC Ferries planned to respond to the questions being raised about how it was managed and how its executives and board members were compensated.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records would help the public understand how BC Ferries planned to respond to the issues raised by the comptroller-general’s report.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Oct. 26, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.21 in which you assessed me a fee of $137.98 for my request 2010-004 in which I asked for records relating to the collision of a BC Ferries ship with the Mayne Island ferry dock on August 3, 2010. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
The August 3 collision received extensive media attention from, among others, The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/ferry-crash-injures-5-strands-200-for-hours/article1660401/), The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/health/people+hurt+after+ferry+crashes+into+Mayne+Island+dock/3354052/story.html) and the Times-Colonist (http://www.timescolonist.com/Five+hurt+ferry+crash/3355294/story.html). BC Ferries has answered some questions about the cause of the crash but this request is specifically asking for records not already released by the ferry corporation.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
Five people were injured in the ferry crash and other B.C. Ferries accidents have led to loss of life (ie. Queen of the North). What, if any, steps BC Ferries could have taken to prevent the crash — and what steps it should take to prevent a similar event from happening again — are of intense public interest.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... disclosing an environmental, public health, safety or other concern... contributing to the development or public understanding of, or debate on, animportant environmental, public health, safety or other issue
These records would help the public understand what led to the Mayne Island dock collision, how BC Ferries investigates such crashes and what, if any, steps BC Ferries has taken to reduce such an incident from occurring again.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Nov. 1, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.22 in which you assessed me a fee of $1,364.83 for my request 2010-001 in which I asked for the name, title, remuneration and expenses for all BC Ferries employees earning $75,000 or more for the 2009-10 fiscal year or the 2009 calendar year. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is three-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I believe that the fee estimate you’ve provided to me is exaggerated. BC Ferries must have an electronic payroll system in place that should be able to provide a list of amounts paid to each employee last year (since that data must already be collected for T4 forms). I don’t see how such a request will take 19 hours to find and retrieve. Any standard database system should be able to export such data in a manner of minutes.
Third, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
The remuneration of senior executives at BC Ferries, in particular CEO David Hahn, has been a subject of intense political and media scrutiny since it was first revealed in the summer of 2009. Hahn’s pay has been covered by The Province (http://www.theprovince.com/entertainment/Million+dollar+Ferries+boss+says+overpaid/2204048/story.html), The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Province+introduces+legislation+salaries+Ferries+executives/2967245/story.html) and CBC among others (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/04/29/bc-bc-ferries-salaries-legislation.html). The pay of BC Ferries senior executives and board members was one of the key concerns raised by
Comptroller-General Cheryl Wenezenki-Yolland in her report on the ferry corporation’s management and led the province to cap BC Ferries executives salaries for future hires. The information I am seeking will detail how managers and other BC Ferries staffers below the executive level are compensated and will allow the public to decide whether the overall pay of BC Ferries’ staff members is out of line.
Furthermore, the information I am seeking (for remuneration above $75,000) is exactly the same information that all government agencies and Crown Corporations are already required to proactively disclose under the Financial Information Act. That data has been used by The Vancouver Sun in the past to create a searchable online database of public-sector pay (vancouversun.com/pay/). As of today’s date, that database has received more than 4 million page views. This shows the enormous public interest in public-sector salaries, a level of interest it’s reasonable to assume would extend to highly paid staff at BC Ferries, as well.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
BC Ferries, while a private corporation, is heavily subsidized by the taxpayer and the high pay of its senior executives has sparked considerable outrage among some members of the public. The public has a right to know how BC Ferries’ staffers below the executive level are being paid, as public money makes up part of their paycheques.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records would help the public determine how BC Ferries staff members are paid, both in isolation and (using The Sun’s public-sector salary database) in comparison to those in similar positions in other public-sector agencies. For example, having this data for BC Ferries would enable the public to determine whether BC Ferries’ media relations staff, or secretaries, are paid more or less than their counterparts at ICBC or BC Hydro.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
I specifically indicated in my original request that, if expense data was not easily retrievable from BC Ferries’ payroll system, that that information could be excluded from the spreadsheet provided to me. BC Ferries has accepted that suggestion and has not included expenses in its calculation. Beyond that, BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Nov. 1, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.27 in which you assessed me a fee of $1,408.96 for my request 2010-037 in which I asked for an itemized breakdown of CEO David Hahn’s total compensation for each year since 2003. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is three-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I believe that the fee estimate you’ve provided to me is exaggerated. The information I am seeking on David Hahn’s compensation is relatively straightforward and I don’t see how such a request should require outside administrative assistance to fulfill.
Third, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
The remuneration of BC Ferries CEO David Hahn, has been a subject of intense political and media scrutiny since it was first revealed last summer. Hahn’s pay has been covered by The Province (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Shock+Ferries+boss+million+salary+revealed/1842602/story.html), The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Province+introduces+legislation+salaries+Ferries+executives/2967245/story.html), CTV (http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100429/bc_ferry_salaries_100529/20100429?hub=BritishColumbia) and CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/04/29/bc-bc-ferries-salaries-legislation.html) among others. The pay of Hahn and other senior executives and board members was one of the key concerns raised by Comptroller-General Cheryl Wenezenki-Yolland in her report on the ferry corporation’s management and led the province to cap BC Ferries executives salaries for future hires. The information I am seeking will detail exactly how well compensated Hahn
is.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
BC Ferries, while a private corporation, is heavily subsidized by the taxpayer and the high pay of its senior executives has sparked considerable outrage among some members of the public. The public has a right to know how Hahn has been paid since 2003, as public money is helping to pay part of his paycheque.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records would help the public determine exactly how well compensated Hahn is and to determine whether they believe his pay is justified. A full accounting of Hahn’s pay, including pension benefits and perks, would also make it possible for the public to compare how Hahn’s pay compares to CEOs at major Crown Corporations in B.C. such as ICBC or BC Hydro.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the request could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to
the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Nov. 1, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.27 in which you assessed me a fee of $3,088.96 for my request 2010-038 in which I asked for an itemized breakdown of total compensation for BC Ferries vice-prseidents for each year since 2003. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is three-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I believe that the fee estimate you’ve provided to me is exaggerated. The information I am seeking on the vice-presidents’ compensation is relatively straightforward and I don’t see how such a request should require outside administrative assistance to fulfill.
Third, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
The remuneration of BC Ferries CEO David Hahn and the corporation’s senior vice presidents, has been a subject of intense political and media scrutiny since it was first revealed last summer. Hahn’s pay has been covered by The Province (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Shock+Ferries+boss+million+salary+revealed/1842602/story.html), The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Province+introduces+legislation+salaries+Ferries+executives/2967245/story.html) and CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/07/29/bc-ferries-executive-salaries-disclosure.html) among others. The pay of Hahn and other senior executives and board members was one of the key concerns raised by Comptroller-General Cheryl Wenezenki-Yolland in her report on the ferry corporation’s management and led the province to cap BC Ferries executives salaries for future hires. The information I am seeking will detail exactly how well compensated BC
Ferries vice-presidents are.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
BC Ferries, while a private corporation, is heavily subsidized by the taxpayer and the high pay of its senior executives has sparked considerable outrage among some members of the public. The public has a right to know how much BC Ferries’ senior executives have been paid since 2003, as public money is helping to pay part of his paycheque.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records would help the public determine exactly how well compensated BC Ferries’ senior executives are and to determine whether they believe his pay is justified. A full accounting of their pay, including pension benefits and perks, would also make it possible for the public to compare how the pay of vice-presidents at BC Ferries compares to senior executives at major Crown Corporations in B.C. such as ICBC or BC Hydro.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Nov. 1, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated Oct.22 in which you assessed me a fee of $165.87 for my request 2010-020 in which I asked for a copy of all e-mails between David Hahn and Darrin Bowland between March 1 and 30, 2006. I have attached the fee estimate letter to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
The sinking of the Queen of the North received extensive media coverage from all media outlets in 2006 and has been in the news frequently since as the various safety investigations and criminal cases associated with the case have continued. A search of The Vancouver Sun’s newspaper database alone shows that the Queen of the North has made the front page no fewer than 25 times since 2006. Recent stories on the tragedy include those in The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/charges-laid-in-sinking-of-queen-of-the-north-ferry/article1502269/), The Province (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Queen+North+passengers+settle+class+action+suit+must+split/3306643/story.html) and The Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Judge+approves+Queen+North+settlement/3438526/story.html). One of the aspects of the Queen of the North case which received extensive media attention was the departure of safety director Darrin Bowland from BC Ferries just days after the sinking and his subsequent wrongful dismissal suit against BC Ferries. The records I am requesting, relatively narrow in scope, will indicate what, if any, communication occurred between Bowland and BC Ferries CEO David Hahn in the days immediately following the accident.
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
The Queen of the North accident killed two people and raised serious questions about BC Ferries safety procedures. The emails I am requesting should provide insight into Bowland’s thoughts about BC Ferries’s safety procedures in the immediate aftermath of the sinking and what Hahn was saying to Bowland about the matter.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to the development or public understanding of, or debate on, animportant environmental, public health, safety or other issue... contributing to a public understanding or debate on an important policy, law,program or services or other issue
These records could help the public gain greater insight into the safety procedures in place at BC Ferries around the time of the sinking and indicate how seriously the corporations’ CEO took the issue.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the request could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun1-200 Granville St.Vancouver, B.C. V6C [email protected]
Nov. 1, 2010
Jason Eamer-GoultFOI CoordinatorBC [email protected]
Mr. Eamer-Goult:
I am writing you in response to your two letters dated Oct.25 in which you assessed me a fee of $2,684.42 for my request 2010-046 and $2,935.30 for my request 2010-045. Both requests concerned records pertaining to asbestos on the Queen of Burnaby and Quadra Queen II respectively. I have attached the fee estimate letters to this email as a PDF.
The purpose of my letter is two-fold. First, I believe that you have incorrectly charged The Vancouver Sun fees as a “commercial applicant” despite OIPC Orders 02-43 and 03-19 which clearly establish that journalists should generally not be treated as commercial applicants.
Second, I am requesting a fee waiver on the basis that the records I am requesting concern a matter of public interest. I am not requesting a fee waiver based on my inability to pay. To help you in assessing my request for a fee waiver, I have made my argument using the two-step manner suggested by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Order 01-24:
STEP ONE: Do the records relate to a matter of public interest?
(a) Is there evidence that the subject of the records has been a matter of recent public debate?
Concerns over asbestos on both ships have received media attention from News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/64044--asbestos-scare-on-b-c-ferry), CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/04/22/bc-asbestos-bc-ferries.html), The Tyee (http://thetyee.ca/News/2010/06/10/FerryAsbestosRisk/) and The Province (http://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/onthewaterfront/archive/2010/06/08/bc-ferries-tackling-latest-asbestos-problem.aspx).
(b) Does the subject of the records relate to the environment, public health or safety or any other matter of public interest?
Asbestos can lead to serious health problems, chief among them mesothelioma. Asbestos concerns aboard the Quadra Queen have already led to a class-action lawsuit (http://www.merchantlaw.com/classactions/asbestos.php). These records should shed light on how serious the asbestos problems were on both ships and what BC Ferries has done to mitigate the risks the ships’ pose to passengers.
(c) Is there evidence that use or dissemination of the records would yield a public benefit by... contributing to the development or public understanding of, or debate on, animportant environmental, public health, safety or other issue
These records should help the public determine how serious the asbestos problems were aboard both ships and also when BC Ferries knew about the problem and if they took appropriate steps immediately to resolve it.
STEP TWO: Dissemination of information
(a) Is the applicant's primary purpose for making the request to use or disseminate the information in a way that can reasonably be expected to benefit the public or is the primary purpose to serve a private interest?
This request is being made solely in my capacity as a reporter with The Vancouver Sun, with the intention of publishing any newsworthy information the records contain. There is no private interest involved in this request.
(b) Is the applicant able to disseminate the information to the public?
As a staff reporter with The Vancouver Sun, I am able to publish articles containing any newsworthy information these records contain. Furthermore, BC Ferries policy of posting records itself on its website ensures they will achieve maximum distribution to the public.
OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS:
(a) Did the applicant, viewed reasonably, cooperate or work constructively with the public body, where the public body so requested during the processing of the access request, including by narrowing or clarifying the access request where it was reasonable to do so?
BC Ferries made no suggestions for how the requests could be narrowed or clarified to reduce fees.
(b) Has the applicant unreasonably rejected a proposal by the public body that would reduce the costs of responding to the access request?
No such proposal has been made by BC Ferries.
(e) Would the waiver of the fee shift an unreasonable cost burden for responding from the applicant to the public body?
The fees associated with these requests are relatively minor and would not place an undue burden on BC Ferries.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have accepted my request for a public interest fee waiver. If you have any further questions, you can call me at 604-605-2892 or email me at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Chad Skelton, ReporterThe Vancouver Sun
Related Documents
