Castanet

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#204062

I think the elephant in this room needs to be seen.....no doubt costs will go up for all the reasons mentioned, but they also go up for a huge reason that isn't mentioned - EVER - when ICBC states reasons for increases.

That reason would be top management salaries, perks, bonuses, pensions, etc. The number of people making over $150,000 per year is quite interesting.....the salary increases that have occurred also give one pause.....

http://globalnews.ca/news/2676317/criti ... -salaries/

So, while I'm not a fan of the NDP, this is one area I hope they dig and dig deep on because we are being played for fools by ICBC and I'm not buying their b.s. anymore.....

I agree that top heavy, overly compensated management are an issue at ICBC. And, I suspect, too much "red tape" and unnecessary paperwork are probably another issue (as they are with ALL Govt agencies). Trying to run a business like a government department is always a recipe for disaster, and ICBC is a business.

An external audit of such matters (one that is paid for by the Govt, as opposed to ICBC itself, so as to prevent any possible interference from ICBC executives), might help expose some of these issues.

However, that said, there are other problems as well that need to be addressed. Allowing people to sue for minor injuries being one of those problems. Suing a driver for gross negligence causing major injury is one thing, but suing other drivers for every little mishap is entirely another. A system like that is ripe for abuse, and we all know it. How many of us know folks who have made claims for imaginary injuries resulting from minor mishaps? I know I do. And every single such claim is paid for by the rest of us. So it's time to stop allowing those kinds of claims and simply pay for actual financial loss.

Finally, drivers who are convicted of reckless driving need to be charged a lot more for their insurance than is currently the case. Because those are the very drivers who are causing all of our rates to go up, and I'm tired of paying for their recklessness.

^^^ I suspect biggest reason more & more people are suing over every bump & burse. Is American style lawyer ads..... you don't pay unless we win you a settlement.

Added: please don't get me wrong here, serious injury or death is totally different thing.

I wonder how the NDP will fix ICBC though. In the report it says that they no longer have the rain day fund like they used to 6-8 years ago. How do you fix the piggy bank once it been smashed and pilfered? This is an issue that needs to be addressed, I wonder what other corporations are a mess, BC Hydro, BC ferries the list could go on. Once more information is revealed we will see the disaster that hopefully can be cleaned up.

And while fixing everything that 'dle' and 'Merry' have pointed out, the B.C. driver's exams should be made much more difficult. I swear half the people I see driving on our streets and highways got their driver's licences out of a box of Fruit Loops.
@TheBoss:
Indeed. That is the million dollar question.What Campbell did was atrocious, but what Christy did by exacerbating the problem was unconscionable. Of course there will be the BC Liberal apologists who will dare to come on these public opinion forums and blame the NDP, either the ones who have been in power for a matter of days, or the ones in power in the 1990s, before the big cash grab began.

TheBoss wrote:I wonder how the NDP will fix ICBC though. In the report it says that they no longer have the rain day fund like they used to 6-8 years ago. How do you fix the piggy bank once it been smashed and pilfered? This is an issue that needs to be addressed, I wonder what other corporations are a mess, BC Hydro, BC ferries the list could go on. Once more information is revealed we will see the disaster that hopefully can be cleaned up.

The Government could use some of the money that was pilfered from ICBC in the first place.

ICBC needs to make those with at fault crashes pay far far more than they do.
They need to use the same system private insurance uses to determine risk as a jumping off point.
For example a 16 years old male pay more based on his age , but also the type of vehicle would come into play.
ICBC needs to be treated like a business , not a welfare program

Want to see people smarten up behind the wheel , implement this.

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/204062 ... ICBC-rates

On average 875 crashes per/day, tells me BC drivers need to smarten up & pay much more attention to what they are doing.

In point of fact, the funds that were taken from ICBC as dividends for government revenues are a relatively small issue in the decline of ICBC reserves. Two major factors resultant from political decisions are much more significant.

1. The government chose to limit ICBC increases artificially, forcing ICBC to use reserve funds to cover the resulting shortfalls - thus actually dispersing ICBC reserves to the collective "us" - drivers - in the form of artificially low premiums.
2. When ICBC complained that basic insurance rates were falling far short of covering claims and increases were necessary, the government response was to force ICBC to shift profits and reserves from optional coverage and financial gains from mandated reserves to balance out the basic coverage shortfall. Once again, the collective "us" - drivers - got artificially low basic insurance rates.

Both of those drove down ICBC reserves and contributed to the mess.

Both of those were strictly political goals to keep ICBC rates from being an "issue". The Liberals were politically astute in that, but it was absolute crass stupidity.

Remarkably, the BC NDP promised to "freeze ICBC rates" taking that crass stupidity to a higher level.

So the question is: will anybody deal with this properly?? My guess is that the Liberals knew that this was a nasty skeleton in the closet and leaked the report to corner the NDP. I doubt the NDP really want to deal with this unless they can secure a "real" governing majority. Significantly increasing ICBC basic rates might be necessary at this time - but my goodness whichever party does that is going to wear it, even though none of them are completely at fault for the underlying problems.

^^I would have given you a 'like' had you not included the last 13 words. The BC Liberals completely screwed up what was originally an excellent Crown corporation. Of course the NDP are going to wear it, but I just hope they are given a long enough time-frame to fix it. It won't be easy, what with all the other screw-ups on their plate, but I'm confident they're up to the task.

hobbyguy wrote:In point of fact, the funds that were taken from ICBC as dividends for government revenues are a relatively small issue in the decline of ICBC reserves. Two major factors resultant from political decisions are much more significant.

1. The government chose to limit ICBC increases artificially, forcing ICBC to use reserve funds to cover the resulting shortfalls - thus actually dispersing ICBC reserves to the collective "us" - drivers - in the form of artificially low premiums.
2. When ICBC complained that basic insurance rates were falling far short of covering claims and increases were necessary, the government response was to force ICBC to shift profits and reserves from optional coverage and financial gains from mandated reserves to balance out the basic coverage shortfall. Once again, the collective "us" - drivers - got artificially low basic insurance rates.

Both of those drove down ICBC reserves and contributed to the mess.

Both of those were strictly political goals to keep ICBC rates from being an "issue". The Liberals were politically astute in that, but it was absolute crass stupidity.

Remarkably, the BC NDP promised to "freeze ICBC rates" taking that crass stupidity to a higher level.

So the question is: will anybody deal with this properly?? My guess is that the Liberals knew that this was a nasty skeleton in the closet and leaked the report to corner the NDP. I doubt the NDP really want to deal with this unless they can secure a "real" governing majority. Significantly increasing ICBC basic rates might be necessary at this time - but my goodness whichever party does that is going to wear it, even though none of them are completely at fault for the underlying problems.

I agree with you for the most part except for your assessment that none of the parties are at fault for the underlying problems. Your own reasoning states that the Liberal government forced ICBC to use reserve funds to artificially keep rates low for political reasons. On top of that the Liberal government took a similar amount of that reserve as dividend payments to "balance" the provincial budget.

Had the Liberals not forced ICBC to use up their reserves to keep rates artificially low, taken money from those reserves to "balance" the budget and allowed ICBC to make moderate increases to it's coverage rates, we wouldn't be faced with a potential 30% rate increase.

The NDP made the promise to freeze ICBC rates before they had an opportunity to see the books and report that showed how dire the situation at ICBC truly is. I'm sure they will be forced to raise rates and they will put the blame squarely where it deserves to be, with the BC LIberals. We've all seen this show before with any new government.

The BC Liberals will say that the NDP are liars and can't be trusted because they promised a rate freeze then raised rates.

The political circus will continue in this province and loyalists for both sides will just blame the other party.

@merry, my understanding that's what the government did was take the Rainy day fund and spent it instead of using it for ICBC.

They do base insurance off of higher risk vehicles, my Town car i was paying 135 dollars a month. My Thunderbird SC I'm only paying 105 dollars a month. Kinda weird considering the Thunderbird is a sports car and the Town car is a old man's cruiser. I guess if more older people drive the town car then it's at a higher risk for an accident *shrugs*

I wonder how bad BC hydro is *shudders* i don't want to find out.

So here's what happened...............

ICBC and BCFerries have been crown corporations for some time. Gordon Campbell turned BCHydro and BCBC (the Building Corporation of BC, which owns most of the government buildings) into crown corporations. The budgets of crown corporations DO NOT appear in the Budget of the BC Government. They have been separated. These crown corps have only one stock holder, the BC Government. The BC government can order these crown corporations to borrow billions and just turn it over to the BC Government. And Christie did just this, using all that cash to balance the budget. But the public debt racked up by the crown corps is still there, and requires servicing and payments.

Chrisite's budgets were never balanced. BCHydro's debt alone is up there somewhere near $70 billion and counting. And the other crown corporations are also wallowing in debt. But it all allowed Christie to smile and pronounce that the budget was balanced. On the credit cards of us all. And nearly half the voters wanted her to continue.

dle wrote:https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-204062-3-.htm#204062

I think the elephant in this room needs to be seen.....no doubt costs will go up for all the reasons mentioned, but they also go up for a huge reason that isn't mentioned - EVER - when ICBC states reasons for increases.

That reason would be top management salaries, perks, bonuses, pensions, etc. The number of people making over $150,000 per year is quite interesting.....the salary increases that have occurred also give one pause.....

http://globalnews.ca/news/2676317/criti ... -salaries/

So, while I'm not a fan of the NDP, this is one area I hope they dig and dig deep on because we are being played for fools by ICBC and I'm not buying their b.s. anymore.....

I won't argue that 145 people making in excess of $150,000 is excessive, however 145 X $150,000 only equals $21 million. Even if you double this amount to cover for those making more and to cover benefit costs you are still looking at $42 million.

This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 1.2 Billion the Liberals took to balance the budget over the years and the 1.4 Billion they forced ICBC to use from their reserves to keep rates artificially low.

Which party was it that made ICBC rates and promise to "freeze them" a political football? It was the BC NDP. They certainly ought to wear the consequences. Instead of an honest discussion with the drivers of BC of what is really going on - it was the BC NDP that turned the entire topic into a toxic political mess. That has been the BC NDP tactic for years regarding ICBC - to use it as a political football, chuck peanuts, and never mind paying attention as to what really needs to be done.

The Liberals should have ignored the peanut chucking and done the right things - but they didn't.

To suggest that it is other than "on the ground" realities driving the ICBC situation is not hitting the mark. Neither party has any culpability in the "ambulance chasing" claims, nor any culpability in idiots that can't leave their phones alone driving up accident rates.

Where the parties do have culpability is in creating an environment that is all toxic games and political brinkmanship around ICBC, instead of seeking solutions.

ETA: the NDP knew exactly, EXACTLY, what was going on with ICBC before the election. The information is all there for analysis in the publicly available reports issued by ICBC.

To claim that the BC NDP were somehow unaware is entirely disingenuous, or else it is an admission that the BC NDP are so incompetent as to be unable to read a financial report and the board's comments and submissions regarding proposed rate increases.