Having lived in the community of Abbotsford for some 23 years, I feel as if I’ve started to get an understanding of it. On a smaller scale, I actually lived in the Clearbrook part of Matsqui for all of those years, starting to spend a lot of time in the central and Abbotsford side from 2006 on when I began attending University of the Fraser Valley. If this is a little complicated, I’ll explain by just reiterating that Abbotsford/Sumas which I understand to have been the more eastern and southern part of what is now Abbotsford merged with Matsqui/Clearbrook which comprised the more western and northern part of the city, some years ago. Indeed, the two became so interlinked as they expanded that to keep them separate would have frankly been silly.
Today, around a year from completing my time at UFV, I’ve been involved to varying degrees with planning the design of the city by attending Transportation Open houses, participating as a citizen in Community Planning sessions, advocating by demonstrating public support for a transit link between Abbotsford and Chilliwack, and helping to orchestrate the U-PASS campaign (which implemented a Student Union backed mandatory public transit pass for all UFV students).
Of late, I’ve had doubt about the justice of such a pass. The amount of money the pass costs each semester is trivial – $40, especially when you consider that not only does the pass cover transit access in Chilliwack and Mission as well as Abbotsford, but also covers major public recreational facilities in each of those cities, as well as numerous discounts generally in the 10-20% range at business throughout the region. I’d wager that as a result of the program, young people of university age in the eastern Fraser Valley are healthier, fitter, and financially better-off, and I’d also wager that our air-shed is cleaner than it would have been.
My doubts over the wisdom of the policy stem from a couple of areas. One is that I suspect that most students at UFV aren’t even aware of the many realized and potential benefits that the program provides to them, and for programs such as this to be truly effective, I believe it’s critical that participants are aware and cognizant of the program’s benefits, or they will be lulled into complacency instead of becoming the alert, aware, and informed guardians of a just and wise society that they should be.
Secondly, the mandatory nature of the pass is a critical flaw in the policy. Were the pass not mandatory and universal it wouldn’t work, but this mandatory nature represents a top-down dictate of what is best for people, depriving them of choice, discussion, and the need to think critically about issues which are directly related to issues of personal liberty at higher levels. A society where people are told how to function, what is best, how they will use their money, and where their biggest personal choices revolve around which products they will consume rather than how they are governed, is a society that strikes me as very vulnerable in many respects to abuse of power by those in power.
I anticipate a response to this argument to be that the students themselves approved this policy by a strong 60% plus majority. This is potentially a very good thing – if their votes were given on the basis of critical thinking rather than on social pressures – as I am afraid may have played out to a larger degree than many are acknowledging in the referendum of 2009. Further, today’s students who are subject to the levy are not the same students who voted to approve it – and by what principle do the students of the Fall 2010 semester deprive the students of today their say? One solid counter-argument is that it would not take much for some particularly concerned student to gather a group to mount a campaign for a referendum to remove the U-PASS to occur. Yet, such a campaign would likely be time-consuming and effort-intensive, and I’ve yet to meet the student who might be forward-thinking and altruistic enough to mount a campaign which would consume significant portions of their time and energy, while possibly only benefiting future classes of students.
I’d not intended to write on this subject today. Rather, I’d intended to work towards a discussion of my frustration with the City of Abbotsford’s foot-dragging in relation to upgrading its transit exchange system. That, I suppose, is a discussion for another day. For now, I’d appreciate your thoughts and input on the U-PASS issue. I’ll remind you that you’re able to post a comment personally or anonymously, and I also welcome personal e-mails to have a discussion that way.
I’ll just close by saying that yes, I was part of the team that campaigned in favour of the pass – and I continue to be of the opinion that the program is excellent policy with potential to be even better with continued advocacy towards the operation and structure of the transit system, but that I do admit that there my be bigger-picture issues here which I and the others who campaigned for this policy may have over-looked in our zeal to create a city that is less vehicle-dependent and less damaging to the environment…
Advertisement
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
Current UFV students run over by a bus?
January 12, 2012
streamrambler Community Living, Finance and economics, Fitness, global warming, Green lifestyle, Political Commentary, Transportation SUS, U-PASS, UFV Leave a comment
Having lived in the community of Abbotsford for some 23 years, I feel as if I’ve started to get an understanding of it. On a smaller scale, I actually lived in the Clearbrook part of Matsqui for all of those years, starting to spend a lot of time in the central and Abbotsford side from 2006 on when I began attending University of the Fraser Valley. If this is a little complicated, I’ll explain by just reiterating that Abbotsford/Sumas which I understand to have been the more eastern and southern part of what is now Abbotsford merged with Matsqui/Clearbrook which comprised the more western and northern part of the city, some years ago. Indeed, the two became so interlinked as they expanded that to keep them separate would have frankly been silly.
Today, around a year from completing my time at UFV, I’ve been involved to varying degrees with planning the design of the city by attending Transportation Open houses, participating as a citizen in Community Planning sessions, advocating by demonstrating public support for a transit link between Abbotsford and Chilliwack, and helping to orchestrate the U-PASS campaign (which implemented a Student Union backed mandatory public transit pass for all UFV students).
Of late, I’ve had doubt about the justice of such a pass. The amount of money the pass costs each semester is trivial – $40, especially when you consider that not only does the pass cover transit access in Chilliwack and Mission as well as Abbotsford, but also covers major public recreational facilities in each of those cities, as well as numerous discounts generally in the 10-20% range at business throughout the region. I’d wager that as a result of the program, young people of university age in the eastern Fraser Valley are healthier, fitter, and financially better-off, and I’d also wager that our air-shed is cleaner than it would have been.
My doubts over the wisdom of the policy stem from a couple of areas. One is that I suspect that most students at UFV aren’t even aware of the many realized and potential benefits that the program provides to them, and for programs such as this to be truly effective, I believe it’s critical that participants are aware and cognizant of the program’s benefits, or they will be lulled into complacency instead of becoming the alert, aware, and informed guardians of a just and wise society that they should be.
Secondly, the mandatory nature of the pass is a critical flaw in the policy. Were the pass not mandatory and universal it wouldn’t work, but this mandatory nature represents a top-down dictate of what is best for people, depriving them of choice, discussion, and the need to think critically about issues which are directly related to issues of personal liberty at higher levels. A society where people are told how to function, what is best, how they will use their money, and where their biggest personal choices revolve around which products they will consume rather than how they are governed, is a society that strikes me as very vulnerable in many respects to abuse of power by those in power.
I anticipate a response to this argument to be that the students themselves approved this policy by a strong 60% plus majority. This is potentially a very good thing – if their votes were given on the basis of critical thinking rather than on social pressures – as I am afraid may have played out to a larger degree than many are acknowledging in the referendum of 2009. Further, today’s students who are subject to the levy are not the same students who voted to approve it – and by what principle do the students of the Fall 2010 semester deprive the students of today their say? One solid counter-argument is that it would not take much for some particularly concerned student to gather a group to mount a campaign for a referendum to remove the U-PASS to occur. Yet, such a campaign would likely be time-consuming and effort-intensive, and I’ve yet to meet the student who might be forward-thinking and altruistic enough to mount a campaign which would consume significant portions of their time and energy, while possibly only benefiting future classes of students.
I’d not intended to write on this subject today. Rather, I’d intended to work towards a discussion of my frustration with the City of Abbotsford’s foot-dragging in relation to upgrading its transit exchange system. That, I suppose, is a discussion for another day. For now, I’d appreciate your thoughts and input on the U-PASS issue. I’ll remind you that you’re able to post a comment personally or anonymously, and I also welcome personal e-mails to have a discussion that way.
I’ll just close by saying that yes, I was part of the team that campaigned in favour of the pass – and I continue to be of the opinion that the program is excellent policy with potential to be even better with continued advocacy towards the operation and structure of the transit system, but that I do admit that there my be bigger-picture issues here which I and the others who campaigned for this policy may have over-looked in our zeal to create a city that is less vehicle-dependent and less damaging to the environment…
Share this:
Like this: