The College has officially decided to scrap the proposed changes to the election bylaws. I am honestly stunned that this worked out the way it did and I know it only happened because you refused to look away. Please keep an eye on things moving forward but for now let …
March 28, 2016
Final supporters
We, the undersigned, are responding to the College’s call for consultation regarding its proposed changes in the bylaws governing its election model by expressing that we unequivocally DO NOT SUPPORT any of the proposed changes that:
- Deny dentists the eligibility for College Board position if they have been a director or candidate of other dental professional associations within three years.
- Limit the eligibility for Treasurer position to only College Board or Committee members who have served within five years.
- Remove the accountability of the elected officers (President, Vice-President and Treasurer) to an annual democratic election process.
We are concerned that the proposed limitation on candidate eligibility, combined with the current volunteer admission process (by selection only), has the essence of, depriving the College Board the ability to attract quality leaders with proven track record in a timely manner, or worse yet, making it progressively closed-minded.
We would also like to add that there is no evidence to support the lack of continuity and consistency in the current election and succession model. Elected officer positions were filled by acclamation in most of the ten years from 2004 to 2014. The natural conclusion is that the registrants had found most of the College policies and decisions supportable.
Continuity and consistency cannot exist in isolation, without the balance of a sound election structure. The potential danger of a regulatory body that exists in isolation is that it will progressively lose accountability, trust, and ultimately support from its registrants. A regulatory body with the confidence of its registrants will be most effective and relevant in its mandate to protect the public.
We urge the College to seriously re-examine the detrimental effects of the proposed changes to the elections bylaws as stated above, and work toward fostering an open, inclusive, evidence-based and accountable College that is annually accountable to the electorate.
Updates
Reached 250 supporters
February 23, 2016
Reached 100 supporters
February 15, 2016
57 Comments
There is no reason why a dentist whom had not met the "eligibility criteria" would not be a good executive board leader. Such thinking would not let someone like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or American President Obama rise to leadership. There are many bright leaders amongst us dentists. Let democracy reign.
The fact that the College feels that they have to limit potential election candidates to those who they hand pick for College sub-committees shows the total contempt they have for the general members who are paying for their salaries.
Arbitrary denial of eligibility for College Board positions, arbitrary limitation of eligibility for the position of Treasurer, and reduced accountability of elected officers with no evidence presented to support this position. Democracy is messy, but it is best option.......always.
More of the same. The College executive is trying to insulate itself from outside criticism and accountability. As a self-governing profession we deserve more than that, and the public as well as the members have the right to exert its influence for the benefit of all
Elected positions need to be open to ANY registrant. No governing body should be allowed to block the candidacy of a member of the electorate who wishes to seek office. It is the privilege and responsibility of the electors as a whole to decide whether that candidate is appropriate and qualified for the position.
Extremely disheartened by this strident attitude by the CDSBC executives. Who does this new set of changes help? Where is the evidence? I absolutely support this petition.
The proposed changes by the board I believe are self serving and not in their mandate. I support the position taken by the BCDA.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
The College has officially decided to scrap the proposed changes to the election bylaws. I am honestly stunned that this worked out the way it did and I know it only happened because you refused to look away. Please keep an eye on things moving forward but for now let …
March 28, 2016
Final supporters
We, the undersigned, are responding to the College’s call for consultation regarding its proposed changes in the bylaws governing its election model by expressing that we unequivocally DO NOT SUPPORT any of the proposed changes that:
- Deny dentists the eligibility for College Board position if they have been a director or candidate of other dental professional associations within three years.
- Limit the eligibility for Treasurer position to only College Board or Committee members who have served within five years.
- Remove the accountability of the elected officers (President, Vice-President and Treasurer) to an annual democratic election process.
We are concerned that the proposed limitation on candidate eligibility, combined with the current volunteer admission process (by selection only), has the essence of, depriving the College Board the ability to attract quality leaders with proven track record in a timely manner, or worse yet, making it progressively closed-minded.
We would also like to add that there is no evidence to support the lack of continuity and consistency in the current election and succession model. Elected officer positions were filled by acclamation in most of the ten years from 2004 to 2014. The natural conclusion is that the registrants had found most of the College policies and decisions supportable.
Continuity and consistency cannot exist in isolation, without the balance of a sound election structure. The potential danger of a regulatory body that exists in isolation is that it will progressively lose accountability, trust, and ultimately support from its registrants. A regulatory body with the confidence of its registrants will be most effective and relevant in its mandate to protect the public.
We urge the College to seriously re-examine the detrimental effects of the proposed changes to the elections bylaws as stated above, and work toward fostering an open, inclusive, evidence-based and accountable College that is annually accountable to the electorate.
Updates
Reached 250 supporters
February 23, 2016
Reached 100 supporters
February 15, 2016
57 Comments
What is the reasoning behind these eligibility guidelines, aside from preserving the status quo? Elected offices need to be accountable at all times, and having an annual election should be part of our democratic process.
There is no reason why a dentist whom had not met the "eligibility criteria" would not be a good executive board leader. Such thinking would not let someone like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or American President Obama rise to leadership. There are many bright leaders amongst us dentists. Let democracy reign.
The fact that the College feels that they have to limit potential election candidates to those who they hand pick for College sub-committees shows the total contempt they have for the general members who are paying for their salaries.
Arbitrary denial of eligibility for College Board positions, arbitrary limitation of eligibility for the position of Treasurer, and reduced accountability of elected officers with no evidence presented to support this position. Democracy is messy, but it is best option.......always.
More of the same. The College executive is trying to insulate itself from outside criticism and accountability. As a self-governing profession we deserve more than that, and the public as well as the members have the right to exert its influence for the benefit of all
Elected positions need to be open to ANY registrant. No governing body should be allowed to block the candidacy of a member of the electorate who wishes to seek office. It is the privilege and responsibility of the electors as a whole to decide whether that candidate is appropriate and qualified for the position.
Extremely disheartened by this strident attitude by the CDSBC executives. Who does this new set of changes help? Where is the evidence? I absolutely support this petition.
The proposed changes by the board I believe are self serving and not in their mandate. I support the position taken by the BCDA.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
What is the reasoning behind these eligibility guidelines, aside from preserving the status quo? Elected offices need to be accountable at all times, and having an annual election should be part of our democratic process.