MPIC once again misleading Parliament, GoM and MB PUB

Feb 22 2018 – Kevin Yaworski – WiseUpWinnipeg

**** DRAFT ****

Related:
In Oct 2017 we posted:
Province of Manitoba, City of Winnipeg and MPIC supporting Road to Zero / Vision Zero Strategy – What this really means
In Dec 2016 we posted
MB PC’s do 180 and support PUB approving 3.7% rate hike for MPIC instead of reining in out of control spending 

In Sept 2016 we posted:
 MPIC diverting Millions to Police for $afety initiatives most of which are a waste and actually putting the public at risk

While the PC party was the official opposition they objected to MPIC rate increases and identified just some of the funds being wasted at MPIC.  We and others have identified many more.  The previous NDP majority govs ignored this and allowed or supported rate increases without requiring MPIC to reign in out of control spending.  Now the PC majority gov is doing the same thing.  The MPIC Board and MP PUB members are appointed by the government in power.  Since WUW exposed this the PC party has removed the page on their website that confirmed it but we have got an copy from internet archive.  The PC party and elected officials involved have refused to respond when asked about this and other serious public safety and interest concerns.  More info below.

MPIC did or tried to give a presentation to MB PUB and or GoM which includes many parts that are false or misleading.  This includes the MPIC, GoM, WPS and CoW Road to Zero – Vision Zero Safety Strategy for 2017 – 2020 that we have already exposed as $afety revenue focused with little to no improvement in engineering, transparency and accountability.  This plan has much more focus on reduced speed limits, new legislation (expanding automated (photo and …) enforcement and much less focus on education and real safety initiatives.   It is also filed with false misleading information. Links to more info below.

Soon as we saw the name Ward Keith (VP with MPIC and with them since at least 2005) on the presentation below we became even more suspicious as he has supported and announced many $afety initiatives in the media filled with $afety propaganda.

Why does the public need a VP of Business Development and Communications and similar directors, high paid execs or senior mgmt for a government mandated monopoly that has a (strict?) mandate including refunding overcharges?  Learn more here.

How many of the following are Ward Keith’s ideas or is he just the messenger?  Regardless he supporting in media and with presentation to our elected and appointed officials.

 

 

MPI diverting overcharges on the following instead of refunding as required by legislation:

Education and Enforcement should be done and funded by independent government bodies not by rate payers.

– For Pilot $afety Studies:
MPIC Diverted $500k to WPS for “better” signage, “visibility” and “enhanced enforcement” at some of MPIC top 10 “most dangerous” intersections while ignoring proper engineering and investing much less on education.  To make matters worse this is not new behavior for them.  WUW filed FIPPA requests about this after many members and the general public reported and documenting WPS at Bishop and St. Mary’s parked unlawfully and unsafely with marked and unmarked vehicles on crosswalks, meridian, bus stops, after intersection (not visible warning) etc… This included one case captured on video where someone called 911 as they thought the unmarked car on crosswalk was involved in an accident.  Firetruck attended, approached the car and they officer sped off.

 

 
WPS and MPIC tried to deny and then delay the FIPPA response until Ombudsman complaint filed.  Then they redacted and severed information without valid reasons siting it would put senior officers (consultants) in danger, would affect the integrity of the safety study etc… There was still enough info to expose senior MPIC and WPS more concerned about funds used to counter budget reduction attempts and not enough violations issued (reoccurring demerit revenue) than visible signage boards (only up for limited time) and enforcement (unmarked cars vs. marked) etc…  WPS was also hoping the data or results would allow more funding in the future.  The date proved there was no issue with speed and the study was flawed in may ways and it’s main goal was to divert funds to WPS.

MPIC CEO, Mayor Bowman, the Police Chief and others signed the agreement for this pilot study.  Escobar (now resigned and …), Councillors Brian Mayes and Janice Lukes and others have been involved in this including studies that ignored dangerous engineering (short 4 sec amber at large 80 km/hr intersections, missing AWF, high rate of rear end collisions,  missing pedestrian count down timers and more) and recommending more studies of up to 18 months etc..  Stay tuned for more info on the trial with engineer brought in to be expert witness.  Closing arguments and decision in March.

MPIC diverting Millions to Police for $afety initiatives most of which are a waste and actually putting the public at risk

– For Police to enforce in Reduced Speed School Zones with inadequate signage
Numbers media coverage of funding diverted to WPS, other Municipal and RCMP Police  .  Yet they ignoring certified engineers recommendations that say they don’t improve safety and all that is needed is proper signage and flashing lights when kids present.  CAA also recommended these lights and the CoW ignored free offer from private sector for installation and maintenance of the lights.  www.wiseupwinnipeg.com/flashinglights

– Funding Police for distracted driving enforcement while investing less on better education
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/mpi-and-police-team-up-to-target-distracted-drivers-1.3053903
– Is MPIC paying for or subsidising CAA Memberships for new drivers?
http://winnipegsun.com/2017/09/05/caa-mpi-offer-reward-to-new-drivers/wcm/13e1aa8f-e68c-47e2-8be9-4f6507c854a1

PUB Orders
PRESENTATION OF WARD KEITH
VICE PRESIDENT, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT &
COMMUNICATION AND CHIEF PRODUCT OFFICER
October 2017

Pages that stood out and draft of responses started for some.

p16
Downward trend continues for motor vehicle fatalities
and fatal collisions despite growth in number of
drivers and vehicles
o  Increase in total fatalities in 2016 is not an indication of long‐term trend reversal
o 2017 preliminary fatalities are tracking well below five‐year average.
With their and Transport Canada stats showing downward trend in fatalities and serious injures why are they promoting so much Enforcement before Engineering and Education with the Road to Zero – Vision Zero and other “safety” initatives?

They are mostly picking and choosing only the parts of the Road to Zero and Vision Zero strategies that proven ineffective elsewhere for improving safety but can lead to higher enforcement revenue.  e.g. More reduced speed limits in urban and rural areas when many already artificially reduced against certified engineers recommendations and the national standards they rely on to protect the public and ensure safe and efficient traffic flow.  It is well documented that these artificially reduced locations also have inadequate or purposely removed signage and are aggressively enforced by 3rd party For Profit photo enforcement partners Traffic Safe Solutions (TSS) and Xerox / Conduent  and traditional officer enforcement.

With this Road to Zero initiative TSS, Conduent, MPIC, WPS, CoW, and GoM also want to expand automated enforcement (photo and …), more officer enforcement and more traffic “safety” legislation.  Not one word about starting to enforce the Conditions of Authority which has been ignored by the Province since Photo Enforcement implemented in 2003 in return for 50% share of the $afety revenue.  No word of enforcing other transparency or accountability legislation and measures or improving this legislation.

Nothing in this initiative / strategy / plan, presentation or in Manitoba Justice annual reports about the much higher than Canadian average rate of alleged simple traffic, parking and bylaw violations and rate of contesting (25% or more) or the upward trend of both.  Nothing about correcting the resulting issues in MB Courts (MB SCC / POC, PC and QB), appeals and motions with unfair or unlawful tickets, tickets to wrong owners, multiple tickets to same owner less than a minute apart but mailed a week apart, delays to go to trial of 24 months or more, lack of or late disclosure, right to face accuser denied or made more difficult and other legal rights and due process issues.  They ignoring this as the root cause is the aggressive targeting of the known and often dangerous and created engineering deficiencies in proper and safe signage, speed limits, intersection amber times and others.  Similar with G4S Tech / WPA aggressively targeting of known and crated parking signage deficiencies (obscured, missing, confusing etc…) plus legislation, bylaw and policy changes that result in more tickets being issues even if unfair or unlawful.

Addressing these known and created deficiencies would mean losing up to $100M per year (of already heavily taxed income) which works out to over $600M with velocity of money (a dollar changes hands on avg 6 times) taken out of the economy or over $6 Billion since 2003.  That much money would have generated a lot of economic growth and legitimate tax revenue.  Instead they letting the few benefit at the expense of the many, society and the economy.  There are other indirect costs and impacts with more officers directed, diverted or asked to volunteer to work regular time or Pensionable OT on traffic duty with net loss to WPS (tax payers).  This even before OT to attend Court, Court Costs etc… or the impact this is having on the focus on serious crime (organised, violent, property, government, corporate, blue collar etc…).  The serious crime rate in Winnipeg is at or near the worst in Canada and one of only two places in Canada where it is not decreasing.

The latest legislation changes from the PC majority government some of which drafted by the previous NDP majority gov take away more due process rights and make it harder to stand up for charter and other legal rights for alleged traffic, parking and bylaw alleged offeces.  It also now requires leave to appeal be granted by a Justice before appeal hearing even when there is so many known and proven issues in the lower court.  This used to be a given right if the appeal application completed correctly.  This on top of a trend of many documented or independently reported cases of bias, errors, lying, misleading, bullying or perjury by operators, officers, clerks, crown, JJP’s or Justices with little to no consequence.

MPIC stats and Transport Canada Stats prove downward trend in fatalities and serious injuries and this well before $afety revenue became the priority over proper engineering, education, diverting MPIC overcharges to $afety initiatives that also ignore proper engineering, education, fairness.  If the engineering issues and polices corrected and better education this trend would improve even more along with less claims,

MPIC diverting Millions to Police for $afety initiatives most of which are a waste and actually putting the public at risk

 

City of Winnipeg and WPS failing to meet the Conditions of Authority from the Province for the Photo Enforcement Program
Province of Manitoba, City of Winnipeg and MPIC supporting Road to Zero / Vision Zero Strategy – What this really means
To learn more about the MBEA, POC and related legislation, bylaw and policy changes related to traffic, parking and bylaw enforcement and related visit:
http://www.wiseupwinnipeg.com/new_plea_process
http://www.wiseupwinnipeg.com
http://www.facebook.com/groups/wiseupwinnipeg.com – pinned post and nested links within it.

p.19
Behavior Change Priorities

Order of priorities is not correct?

1. Distracted Driving
 – Serious but over stated or estimated?
2. Speed
– almost never the cause or even a substantial factor
3. Impaired Driving
     – why are the numerous reports of police ignoring calls from outside bars of drunk drives yet MPIC and Police rely on after the fact Check Stops and they issue 100’s of minor violations at each one and very few DUI?  Why are there allegations of it ignored as it hurts tax revenue from alcohol sales.  Distrust proven by the large number of the public that do not condone DUI but join large FB Groups to avoid the delay, hassle and risk minor violation.Pedestrian Safety
   – Should be higher up as the leading cause of pedestrian fatalities is pedestrian error?
Following Too Closely
– dangerously short amber times creates more rear end collections, injuries and claims etc…
Failure to Use Occupant Restraints
    – Did the RCMP not state the # 1 cause of fatalities at least in Rural was failure to wear seat belt?
Motorcyclist Safety
Cyclist Safety
  – Better infrastructure like many cycling friendly cities have done prevent accidents
– Promotes active healthy lifestyle and reduced healthcare costs etc…
 
PUB Orders

p32
Provide analysis of road safety budgets of SGI and ICBC, including
mandate of those insurers, their annual road safety budgets,
and budget breakdown by initiative, compared to MPI’s road
safety budget

What criteria are they using to compare.  Have there been an independent assessment of MPIC and these other public insurers?
How about compare value for money from private insurance in the Provinces that offer this like AB and …?

p.36
PUB Order 10.29
File the Road Safety Plan prepared by the Provincial Road Safety
Committee and produce a witness from the Government of
Manitoba in the 2018 GRA hearings to provide a presentation of
the Road Safety Plan
• Road to Zero has been filed
• MPI lacks authority to compel the Government

See summary of our response to this initiative / plan already above and in large draft here:
Province of Manitoba, City of Winnipeg and MPIC supporting Road to Zero / Vision Zero Strategy – What this really means

 

p38
PUB Oder 10.312
Clarify the Corporation’s stance on the use of the Safe systems
model or a Vision Zero target for collisions
• Adoption of a Safe Systems model and Toward Zero approach to road safety
requires jurisdictional support which would be achieved through the
Provincial Road Safety Committee
• MPI supports the adoption of these approaches by the Provincial Road
Safety Committee

See summary of our response to this initiative / plan already above and in large draft here:
Province of Manitoba, City of Winnipeg and MPIC supporting Road to Zero / Vision Zero Strategy – What this really means

Source:

2018 General Rate Application
http://www.pubmanitoba.ca/v1/proceedings-decisions/appl-current/pubs/2018%20mpi%20gra/mpi_004_road_to_zero_manitoba_road_safety_plan.pdf

Powerpoint
Update on committee work provided Road to Zero: Manitoba
Road Safety Plan 2017
Released September 29

http://www.pubmanitoba.ca/v1/proceedings-decisions/appl-current/pubs/2018%20mpi%20gra/mpi_012_loss_prevention_road_safety_by_ward_keith.pdf

Searching GoM site for Road to Zero:
http://discovery.gov.mb.ca/search?q=Road+to+zero&entqr=0&output=xml_no_dtd&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&ud=1&oe=iso-8859-1&filter=0&ie=iso-8859-1&client=manitoba&proxystylesheet=manitoba&site=default_collection

About Kevin Yaworski

I use my blog to write about things I find interesting or that I think are matter of public interest.
This entry was posted in justice, News and politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s