The B.C. Liberal government has backed down on restricting political parties from advertising their positions on a referendum planned for May.
“We got a message from Elections B.C. saying the Lieutenant Governor and council had amended the regulation,” said B.C. Green Party leader Jane Sterk.
In November The Tyee reported that Elections B.C.'s interpretation of a regulation on referendum advertising was it banned parties from stating in their campaign materials a position about the May 12 referendum on adopting the Single Transferable Vote system.
“There was a lack of clarity in the existing regulation,” said Shawn Robbins, a spokesperson for the Attorney General ministry. The intention was never to restrict discussion of the referendum, he said. “I think it's good we've clarified it.”
“We're glad to have it clarified,” said Nola Western, an Elections B.C. director responsible for electoral finance.
The amended regulation, passed on Dec. 11, adds a clause saying “candidates and registered political parties may engage in referendum advertising and, for this purpose, the referendum advertising is deemed to be election advertising under the Election Act.”
Sterk said criticism from parties, the public and the media made the cabinet change their minds. “It was not supportable,” she said. “I think it's as simple as that.” The original regulation was passed with many other orders in council, she said. “They may have thought nobody would really notice.”
The Green Party will be advertising its support for a 'yes' vote. “We support BC-STV. I personally like BC-STV,” said Sterk. “It shifts the balance of loyalties from parties to the people in a riding. I think it's a good thing.”
She hopes people will ask other parties running in the election for their positions, she said, adding the referendum should be a campaign issue. “It's a critically important issue for democracy.”
Andrew MacLeod is The Tyee’s Legislative Bureau Chief in Victoria. Reach him here.
4
Login or register to post comments
Tony
3 years ago
I'm Cautiously Pleased (With Caveats)
I'm cautiously pleased with this announcement. Obviously, more public debate about STV is essential. I really wish the government would go all out and ensure that there is a televised debate and, true to the original grassroots Citizens' Assembly approach, sponsor a series of townhall meetings around the province. I'd even be glad if they decided to re-issue the CA report (which they've decided not to - apparently anyone who wants to know about this will be inspired enough to go to the CA website and download it). I'd especially like the government to commit itself to a program of building public awareness with clear goals (90% awareness was achieved in New Zealand in 1993 - why shouldn't we do just as well here instead of the pathetic 30-50% we had last time), but they've shown no interest in doing so so far.
Unfortunately, the government has taken none of these actions. Furthermore, this latest change promotes the voices of the political parties above those of the ordinary citizens of BC. Political parties in BC are allowed to issue tax receipts; the rebate is 75% on the first $100, so parties can raise funds for 1/4 the cost of the proponent and opponent groups, which makes it easier for their voices to be heard.
As long as the debate stays non-partisan and focused on how BC-STV responds to the expressed wishes of voters, I'm fine with this, but I would be very concerned if this became a debate over partisan interest. The two parties currently in the legislature have benefited from the 'winner's bonus' in our current system and they would have to give this up (though they never really deserved it based on their share of the popular vote). While there are strong and principled reasons why this would be in their long-term best interests (eg, it would provide job security for good MLAs who are responsive to their core constituents because they will continue to be re-elected regardless of how voters who support other candidates or parties vote), accepting BC-STV requires broad public support.
We have evidence that this support exists - once people understand what STV is about, over 70% are in favour, almost regardless of what party they support. So let's keep the focus on how BC-STV is fair to voters and gives us all what we want - the MLA we choose on our ballots.
Skywalker
3 years ago
I guess that shows...
..it really is a gag law. Otherwise why would they have repealed it for one group.
An Interested O...
3 years ago
STV is Voter-Centric, NOT Politician-Centric
If you remember that STV empowers the voter at the 'expense' of politicians this rule can be seen as another way to finance opposition to STV. I think with all the shenanigans in Federal politics in regard to representation there is something of a revival of interest in alternate voting methods, so this rule change seems well timed to counter any associated surge in political sympathies on this issue.
VancouverPointGreen
3 years ago
Give FPP the boot!
Good for Jane and the GPBC for catching this from slipping through the undemocratic cracks. It is obvious that the BC Liberals and NDP were more than happy to keep the status quo from their lack of position the last time around and it was ridiculous for, then leader, Adriane Carr,to come out opposing it when 90%+ of their candidates throughout the province endorsed it, as I'm sure they will again. Hopefully, British Columbians will be better educated to the benefits of a more democratic preferential system that would diminish the bi-partisan rivalry and give First Past the Post the boot it deserves.