Hot Button Bill: Libs Rush to Change Election Laws
Diverse foes say Bill 42 would crimp free speech, hurt poor voters.
Premier Campbell: Libs headed for court?
The BC Liberals' plan to change election laws is drawing fire from diverse quarters and if passed will be challenged in court, vow critics.
Among those speaking out against Bill 42 are business groups who normally back the Liberals, civil libertarians, and advocates for people living in poverty.
Getting most of the flak are two aspects of the proposed legislation.
The new law would require new identification for all voters that some say will discriminate against the poor.
Another provision in the bill would cut way back on third party advertising in the months before an election, a change that business groups, unions and other organizations say censors their ability to educate voters about issues the parties might not be spotlighting in their campaigns.
Bill 42 appears fast-tracked for passage later this month without any debate in the legislature
'We are going to disenfranchise individuals'
"With one small stroke of the legislator's pen, we've gone back decades," said Murray Mollard, the executive director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. "We are going to disenfranchise individuals who are unable to vote because they do not have the requisite ID."
The proposed rules included in Bill 42, the Election Amendment Act, are similar to ones the federal government introduced last year. They require voters to have identification issued either by the province or the federal government that includes their name, photograph and address. Unlike the federal rules, the provincial rules also accept proof of status under the Indian Act, but they are still rousing opposition.
"If you don't have a driver's license, the odds are pretty good you're going to have a tough time when you show up at the polling place," said Jim Quail, an attorney who is executive director of the B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre. "This is a very serious issue for people in the Downtown Eastside, where many people do not have identification documents." Tenants who have recently moved will also have trouble, he said.
It's a strategy stolen from the Republican Party in the United States, he said, which brought in similar rules about 18 months ago in various states where the party controlled the legislature. "The people who were going to lose the right to vote in those states were going to be tenants, students, relatively mobile people, who tend to vote Democrat."
Federal challenge underway
BCPIAC is already challenging the Canadian federal rules. "I have a case before the British Columbia Supreme Court that will be heard in a couple of months' time to challenge the federal legislation," said Quail. "We expect the provincial legislation, if they are foolish enough to proceed with it, to fall along with the federal law."
Mollard said his organization is also ready to go to court. "The BC Civil Liberties Association is going to participate in the challenge to the federal legislation," he said. "I would expect my organization to be very enthusiastic about a challenge to the B.C. legislation as well."
Others hoped Attorney General Wally Oppal would see the folly of introducing legislation that is unlikely to withstand a court challenge and either withdraw it or amend it before the government passes it.
"Before we end up going to court, is there room for the simple voice of common sense?" asked Al Mitchell, a manager with the Lookout Emergency Aid Society. "All we're saying is, hey, here's some things that you ain't maybe thought about. Stop. Take a second look."
Oppal was unavailable.
Redefining 'election advertising'
Another section of the Election Amendment Act limits the amount people other than political parties can spend on advertising in the five months before an election.
Groups like the B.C. Teachers Federation, Hospital Employees Union, Mining Association of B.C. and the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association of B.C. have been heavy advertisers during recent elections. There have been no limits on their election advertising since the B.C. Supreme Court struck down similar legislation in 2000.
Under the new rules, third parties would be limited to spending $3,000 in any one constituency, and not more than $150,000 across the province. The bill redefines "election advertising" as "an advertising message that promotes or opposes, directly or indirectly, a registered political party or the election of a candidate, including an advertising message that takes a position on an issue with which a registered political party or candidate is associated."
"We are paying attention to it," said Byng Giraud, the vice-president of policy and communications for the Mining Association of B.C. Most companies give directly to the B.C. Liberals, he said, rather than engaging in the "political game" directly. "It's not the end of the world, that legislation, but we are paying attention to it."
Law not needed: ICBA's Hochstein
The mining association does have questions about what would be considered "election advertising," Giraud said. Could they buy ads, he asked, promoting mining week, celebrating the industry, or would the issue be considered "associated" with a particular party? "We may have to go to some lawyers and see what this will mean to us."
Asked if the mining issue is associated with one party, he said, "If you look at the record, one would say the companies themselves have given more to the B.C. Liberals. We're clearly a little more comfortable with the current government, [though] some days that's not the case."
Over at the ICBA, president Philip Hochstein said the Liberals' legislation is a fix for something that is not a problem. "I think there's a role for people or groups to play in the election," he said. "I don't think democracy is hurt by many voices participating. I think it's helped at the end of the day."
Getting a message out to the public costs money. "I find it a little unfortunate that it was curtailed," he said.
Sure, some individuals or organizations can afford more advertising than others, but that is the world we live in, he said. "People are bombarded with competing and conflicting messages all the time. There are endless sources of information. I think the public is smart enough to sort that out."
Asked why more businesses wouldn't just give the money to their party of choice and let it represent their views, he said, "I think it's because sometimes we have a message that the party's not interested in putting out."
Bill will pass without debate
While there are plenty of people with reasons to oppose the bill, they will have to hurry to express their concerns to the government.
The bill is among those that will be deemed passed at 5 p.m. on May 29, even if it has not yet gone through all the normal stages of debate. It was introduced and given first reading along with several other bills on April 30, the last day during the session that new legislation could be introduced.
"That's cutting off debate," said Vancouver-Kensington MLA David Chudnovsky. "That's taking an undemocratic bill and passing it in an undemocratic way."
The MLA for Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, Jenny Kwan, said the Liberals are breaking a promise to allow full debate on changes that affect how elections are run. "They're limiting the Opposition's ability to actually debate this bill, and they're limiting the community's ability to respond to the government's bill," she said.
PIAC's Quail said the Liberals may have strategic reasons for hurrying the bill through. "The government is determined to ram this through as fast as they can so there isn't an opportunity for people to see what they are doing to us."
Related Tyee stories:
- Funding Found for New Vote on How BC Elects
$1.5 million to explain pros and cons of STV. - Democracy for Sale
Part One: The Problem. By allowing unlimited donations from corporations and unions, BC's democracy is corrupted by non-voters. - Democracy for Sale
Part Two: The Solution. BC shares with Alberta the dubious distinction of employing the fewest safeguards against big money in politics.




55
Login or register to post comments
SharingIsGood
3 years ago
contact your MLA
Contact your MLA to stop this attack on freedom and the poor:
Don't wait!
http://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/3-4.asp
Grumpy
3 years ago
Maybe.........
.......... an armed revolution is needed. Well, would not that please VANOC and the Olympic organization.
Luke Skywalker
3 years ago
Third Party Spending Limits
In 1995 the then NDP government brought forth $5,000 maximum third party spending limits, which were determined unreasonable by the Courts.
In 2005, third party advertisers spent millions, which verged on the other extreme.
And those are the exact same figures stated under Section 350 of the Canada Election Act, which were upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada with extensive reasons all centred around the concept of "fairness" and "unfairness."
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2004/2004scc33/2004scc33.html
Funny thing though. Alberta is also revising its third party spending limits, based upon millions of dollars spent in third party advertising in that election, a few months back.
Those millions of union advertising dollars were spent against the incumbent PC government to the benefit of both the NDP and Liberals.
Ya know what? Alberta NDP leader Brian Mason now also supports these third party spending limits 'cause the millions spent by unions et al in third party advertising was unfair.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=f0566953-21fb-4663-9f50-2c918cb99803
gordon
3 years ago
Grumpy...
Just after they take all your rights, they will cut off your left arms too...
Chris H
3 years ago
Self-interest
There is little doubt that this proposed legislation is there for the explicit self-interest of the BC Liberal Party. Where are the limits in donations or the end of businesses and unions donating directly to political parties? The legislation makes no sense in any other way. I am a little shocked that anyone could hold their nose and vote for someone who would support this.
Gary
3 years ago
Now we know
This premier takes every opportunity to have his photo taken. So what is to stop big business from using all those photos in their personal company advertising. Nice gimmick if it works
Remember this guy doesn't do anything unless it benefits either him and/or his buddies.
G West
3 years ago
This issue can't be discussed
This issue can't be discussed in a vacuum - it it part of the whole political financing issue and on that score the Campbell government and the Premier is disingenuous at best.
Premier's Campbell party holds a dubious new record: No political party in British Columbia, in Canada, even in North America is as dependent on corporate special interests as the BC Liberal Party.
Corporations and commercial organizations contributed 71% of the money donated to the BC Liberals in 2002. Individuals only contributed 25% of the money given to the party last year. Moreover, 90% of BC Liberal s money comes from large contributors (over $250).
We've all heard the nonsense from the Premier's stalking horses like Chrisy Clark: "Unions bankroll the NDP and small medium and large sized business pay for a lot of Liberal financing."
However, this is simply not the case. In 2002, the NDP received over 95% of its contribution from individuals, with 2% coming from trade unions. Labour does contribute more in election years and that's clearly where this legislation is directed. Even so, the two-year average for the NDP is still 85% individuals, 13% trade unions. The BC Liberals are fully five times as dependent on corporations as the NDP on trade unions.
Joy MacPhail proposed eliminating corporate and union donations in provincial politics, remember?
I think you'll recall what his reaction was.
So much for fairness!
In fact, it is here in BC, with the most "corporate" government in Canada, a government virtually unconstrained by legislative oversight, that a ban on corporate and union donations is needed most. Indeed, the BC Liberals themselves might benefit most from the change. The Premier’s party would be forced to reach out beyond their special interests to a broader constituency across BC, and become a more representative and successful government.
So, reform political financing first - then we'll talk about this current bill, and pleas, no more conflating 'fairness' with Gordon Campbell - it's not in his lexicon.
I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.
G West
G West
3 years ago
errata
should be it 'is' in first sentence.
Sorry.
Skywalker
3 years ago
I don't suppose..
...this will curtail the donations to the liberal part in the range of tens of thousands from forest companies, corporations, automobile retailers, mining companies and independent power producers (just to name a few) all those who get beneficial legislation passed by their friends. No, the liberals would not pass a law that cuts off their source of funds. Business interests will still be protected as they give directly to the liberals and that's OK.
Jeffrey J.
3 years ago
CanWestGlobal to the Rescue
Who needs private corporate political donations when Campbell already has the press in his pocket. CanWestGlobal (owner of all of BC's dailies and many weeklies) donated $50,000 to Campbell's last election. David Black, who owns the other half of BC's media (most of its weeklies) was appointed by Campbell as chairman of the BC Progress Board, complete with a handsome stipend I assume. A Liberal creation full of right wing self praise .
http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/archive/2001-2005/2004OTP0077-000817-Attachment1.htm
How these two media companies differ from a state controlled media is hard to fathom. So lets get rid of ALL advertising and political contributions. Campbell's Liberals would get all the press, and rule in perpetuity. Can't wait!
Great coverage Tyee.
snert
3 years ago
I don't agree with
either of the two contentious aspects of this bill but since when did having to jump through a few extra hoops constitute losing a right.
G West
3 years ago
There will be an election one year from today
In order to eliminate and end whatever this bunch is currently trying to do it's absolutely necessary that the campaign against the Campbell party begin today and roll on with increasing intensity until the actual election.
Only by turfing out Gordon Campbell and his crew of sycophants will there be an opportunity to clean up the mess and begin to rebuild the destruction that 7 years under the iron heel of this government have inflicted upon the people, the traditions, the culture and the fabric of this province.
All the rest is just window dressing - they have to go. There is one year to bring this about – it doesn’t matter, at bottom, who is elected in his place – the rallying cry could be ‘Anybody but Campbell.’
I invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.
G West
no1important
3 years ago
...the sad part is we have
...the sad part is we have no effective opposition with Carole James and the sheeple of BC will vote El Gordo in again next May....even from communities that have lost forestry jobs. They may complain but in the end will not vote NDP...
seth
3 years ago
Free neocon advertising
Campbell and his cohorts are notorious for twisted partisan slanted pro liberal, public paid British Columbia government advertising up to and including the election. This would be worth millions in free advertising and no limits.
We all know BC's Big Media have marked Neocon bias.
http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/73
..The_Death_of_Canadian_Journalism.html
This gives Campbell and his gang a huge third party advertiser not covered by their planned legislation. Again millions in free biased advertising and completely free.
mainstradical
3 years ago
NDP Obama
We need a new leader for the NDP - an inspiring person of impeccable ethics. Does anyone like that exist?
Stump
3 years ago
who needs a picture
How ever did we manage before picture id?
Just fine I'm sure, considering voting has been around a lot longer than driver's licenses.
It's a bit more than simply jumping through hoops if you lack a home or an address... but still live in the city. Why should poverty equal the removal of franchise? Too convenient by half if you ask me.
SharingIsGood
3 years ago
perhaps
As Seth has pointed out: MSM and government expenditures on advertising constitute election advertising.
Perhaps if this law is ever enacted, we can challenge the courts to shut down CTV, Black press and Asper's Canwest-global. Certainly their unbalanced, pro-Liberal reporting constitutes election advertising.
The spending of public funds by the Liberal government when they always tell us what a great job they are doing with our money is also election advertising and this must stop too! It should be challenged in the courts with the Liberals having their own rediculous laws used against themselves.
Every day I look for banana plantations to begin being started down in the lower mainland: we are certainly moving toward being a banana republic.
Skywalker
3 years ago
Yeah Jeffrey J. even the CBC
It is frustrating at times to see the CBC give Campbell such an easy ride. Back in the 90's every interview by and NDP Minister was followed by an interview from the Liberal Opposition, now interviews are followed by government members. If it happens at all, as it did today, that James is interviewed by the reporter last on an issue, Mark Forsythe acts like he's the critic for the liberals and raises all the points that a liberal member might raise to counter her position. I'm no fan of James but fair is fair.
brian gough
3 years ago
everyone relax a little
This is all good, read between the lines,the only reason this is being done is the fact that gordon(the gargler) campbell doesn`t believe the ipsos reid and mustel polls.
The ndp are not going to lose any of their seats but campbell is going to lose the 3 vancouver island seats they have--they will lose their delta seat--they will lose 2 surrey seats( because os surrey memorial hospital and gas tax)--they will lose maple ridge over run of river--Falcon is losing his seat!---north burnaby seat campbell will lose( thanks to mayor corrigan)--and if you all remember campbell himself barely won his own seat in point grey in 2005( now because of the giveaway to the musqueam,spirit park,point grey school closing,the major churches in point grey want gateway stopped, and he`s pissed off the golfers!
Also this bill will be squashed by the court! So ignore luke skywalker,ignore the polls,the gargler running scared,in fact there`s even a rumour floating around that campbell gargler might cancel the carbon tax!
seniors are voting campbell out--the middle class is voting campbell out--true enviromentalists are voting campbell out(sierra club and suzuki foundation members are merely looking for money but they won`t be voting for campbell)
Many liberal voters are going to abstain from voting!
Remember who comes out and votes in big numbers--seniors-middle class and there`s not enough rich voters to offset the tide of unhappy!
So life is good --Gordo is scared-half the back benchers are resigning and you can`t tell poor people that they are really rich!
Whistleblowers BC
3 years ago
Attack on Democracy
Most people on here would not understand what a serious and structural attack on democracy this is for those who live (and die) in the lower socio-economic classes.
The BC government, as a matter of policy and practice, denies income assistance clients the human right to obtain identification. If welfare has copies on file, they will not fund replacement ID. That in itself is a violation of people's human rights. With the pittance people receive on income assistance, or disability, there are thousands and thousands of citizens who are marginalized by the BC Liberals already. To use this structurally embedded circumstance and to now push through this legislation, which will disenfranchise (even more) of these citizens is a Charter of Rights violation, as well as quite likely a violation of Canada's commitment to several United Nations Charters.
This exclusion and barrier to full participation in society will now disproportionally disadvantage and disenfranchise individuals with disabilities. There is a new UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, I suggest all of these clever lawyers around consider working to put together a case to present at the new UN Committee about democracy, inclusion and justice for marginalized citizens BC Liberal-style. I'm sure the UN would be quite interested to hear about Mr. Campbell's (and his backroom masters')plans and they might even have some feedback for him and his ilk.
Mr. Oppal, if you allow this legislation to be passed, as a learned jurist and now as the Attorney General, you have ceased to have any relevancy as a man of justice, democracy and as a representative of the public good in BC. You will also go down in history as the man who excluded generations of BC citizens from their right to participate in democracy and be included in the province of BC. You should resign if they push it through in spite of your disagreement as the AG. And then, you should write a great "tell-all."
http://whistleblowersbc.blogspot.com/
morechatter
3 years ago
Ifs Its Not Broke Don't Fix It
Wise words but not for the Libs they have been Fixing up everything since they got into to power and now its really costing the tax payer. So what does the premier want to fix here or better yet fix it so he doesn't have to concern himself with the needs and wants of his lower income citizens. Is that what he's trying to fix? Say like when he had that radio broadcast where he tried to fix the views of its listeners. Yes sir our premiers a fixer just got to hope he doesn't have his fix on you. Didn't his aid tried to fix that rail deal. And what about that translink deal thats a fix?
greengreen
3 years ago
Royalty knows no bounds
So, the Libs will haul in their usual amount of cash from corporations, then run another advertising campaign as they did last time (B.C.-the best place in the world, or whatever) Even Vanderzalm said what they were doing was blatant partisanship.
Will they get a way with it? Of course.
realisticman
3 years ago
Duh
How could anyone oppose this law on this basis?
How could anyone not have some form of ID?
How could anyone without ID expect to be able to vote?
How could anyone in a democratic society willingly have their vote possibly diluted by others without proof of citizenship or residence voting too?
If this law does not pass does that mean that I can run around and vote anywhere, again and again, without showing ID?
brian gough
3 years ago
ID--not a problem
The ndp have a great grass roots orginization and they will make sure the voters vote--bc id always worked in the past, and another voter can vouch for a voter with an oath of truth!
Campbell(lushwell) is just trying to get every edge he can because he`s running scared!
Welfare stubs will work,with a voucher-but its really not the issue !
would campbell be freaking out if he was so popular!
the biggest voting block is seniors and middle class, young people don`t vote!--and there`s not enough rich people to offset the ndp vote!
I could imagine campbells next move is to use DIEBOLD touch screen voting machines( a la george w bush) Campbell(old yeller)is scared , don`t listen to luke skywalker!
G West
3 years ago
How could anyone not have some form of ID?
Surely this is in jest?
Even if an individual has a social insurance card and a birth certificate they wouldn't be permitted to vote under this regime.
Why should photo ID have anything to do with the franchise? Unless the ID is free it will be an impediment to a particular class of citizens – ironically the same class of citizens who have few of the other advantages of citizenship. Now you want to take even that ‘right’ away.
Are you not familiar with the current practice? One enters one's name on the voters list (if it isn't already there) the then votes in the riding in which one lives.
There is not now, nor has there ever been, a serious problem with multiple votes.
There is a serious problem with citizens being so disenchanted with the shortcomings of the system that they don't vote at all.
Campbell would do something significant if he passed a law making voting compulsory - it works in Australia - why not here?
Instead, this anti-democratic Premier and his disingenuous Attotrney General are conjuring up difficulties where none exist.
Bizarre, but no stranger than most of the actions of this terrible government.
I have NEVER been asked for ID when I voted - have you?
I invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.
G West
BrianWhite
3 years ago
Best place in the world for propaganda
The poor businessmen could have been getting their business message out through various advertizing agencys. Now they will have that money and nowhere to put it! "I know, lets give it as a donation to somebody instead" .
So by doing this, they have tightened their grip on advertizing agencys, and stuck themselves in as the "middleman" in business advertizing during that period.
There will be even more room in the media for endless "best place in the world" bs because business will not be competing for advertizing slots because they are not allowed.
Incredibly bad actually.
dp
3 years ago
"Anti-democratic" is putting it mildly
After I read the article I wondered about one thing: Does this limit the amount of ink that the local papers can spill in favour of their business friends? In Vancouver, anyway, the amount of partisan electioneering the wretched dailies perform is quite outrageous.
And after I read the other comments, I was disturbed by the 'if other people can't be like me, then then don't deserve the same rights and privileges as me' attitude. Simply put: There are lots of reasons people entitled to vote won't be able to provide the required identifications.
Disenfranchising people is essentially the hallmark of regimes that are not democratic. I mean if they're striving to achieve some ethereal level of legitimacy, why not go all the way: "Only landowners will be allowed to vote"?
avandoc
3 years ago
Voters running amok
I guess those of us who have nothing better to do will be very busy on election day running around and voting again and again. In the meantime, let's advocate for real election reform and stop the flow of vast sums to keep incumbent politicians entrenched. While we're at it, let's work for a system of proportional representation so that all of our votes will actually mean something.
In the current system, 46% of voters elected a government with an absolute majority. 54% of us have no voice in this government, which is making irreversible changes to the fabric of our society. In a purported democracy, I find that shocking! If a few people engage in fraud, is that really our biggest electoral problem?
It's the same old trick--the BC Libs created a straw man, an unidentified fraudulent voter, to distract us from their fraudulent policies.
rikia
3 years ago
>>Asked why more businesses
>>Asked why more businesses wouldn't just give the money to their party of choice and let it represent their views, he said, "I think it's because sometimes we have a message that the party's not interested in putting out."<<
So instead of views of the majority, we get the views of a few special interest groups with deep pockets. And this broken system is considered democracy?
How many citizens like to see their money wasted on election advertising? How many hard working people in unions like to see their money wasted on election advertising? It's a race to the bottom to see which side can waste more money, and it's time for some common sense budget limits.
Do we need to see a union spending $5 million in advertising that says little more than "the government is evil"? Where is the public good in that?
Frank
3 years ago
rikia
How do you know you're getting the views of the majority when you see a Liberal ad? After all it was funded by the same special interest groups.
So you'd prefer they give that 5 million to the NDP so they can run the "Campbell is evil" ad?
zalm
3 years ago
I don't agree with snert
In the absence of proof of abuse, why enact the law? If even your chief electoral officer thinks election registration needs to be liberalized? Wasn't this the government that sought to REDUCE regulation, not INCREASE it?
Let me put it another way. Let's say you're happily living in a country where your grandparents were born, complying with the laws, running a business, raising your family, volunteering to social and cultural organizations, when all of the sudden, the government requires everyone to:
- list the names and origins or ethnic backgrounds of their grandparents.
- show identification when renting a hotel room - for every party renting the room, and give the ethnic origin, when asked.
- when you apply to re-register the employment contract of your domestic maid, you are required to give the names and ethnic bacgrounds of both you and your maid.
- the flag you fly outside your house is examined and a man knocks at your door.
Sound familiar? Just a few more hoops to jump through - no trouble at all, right? If you're a law-abiding citizen, you've no worries, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws
Nope, you've just become a non-citizen.
ripponfalls
3 years ago
Voter ID
This is not something unique to Canada: they are just pushing the neo-con line from George Bush and co (well, we always knew that Campbell and Harper were Bush's poodles).
As in the following editorial from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/opinion/13tue1.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print
May 13, 2008
EDITORIAL
The Myth of Voter Fraud
...There is no evidence that voting by noncitizens is a significant problem...
....There is, however, ample evidence that a requirement of proof of citizenship will keep many eligible voters from voting. Many people do not have birth certificates or other acceptable proof of citizenship, and for some people, that proof is not available....
... the driving force behind strict voter ID requirements in general is not a genuine effort to prevent fraud, since there is virtually no evidence that in-person voter fraud is occurring. It is, rather, the Republican Party’s electoral calculations. Barriers at the polls drive down voter turnout, especially among the poor, racial minorities and students — groups that are less likely than average to have driver’s licenses, and that are more likely than average to vote Democratic.
realisticman
3 years ago
a van doc
Sure Doc; no big deal. That's what the Liberal Sponsorship thing was all about, eh? Just a teenie, weenie bit of fraud. Everyone does it a little bit, right?
It's all soon to be moot. Technology will overwhelm voting, as it will most aspects of our lives. The next Health Care cards will almost certainly have data embedded, with critical personal history that will save lives. These cards could be used for ID applications.
from Privacy International:
Technology that facilitates the right of citizens to participate in the public discourse may threaten privacy, especially when it is associated with the administration of elections and, under certain conditions, the very act of voting. The use of technology in the online and offline voting process remains in transition around the world. The criticisms of electronic voting systems focus on the accuracy, reliability, and security of votes once cast. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights support the right of citizens to both privacy and self-governance. In 1983, the first definition of democracy in Europe, which included an affirmation of the right to a secret ballot, was expressed at the conclusion of the first Strasbourg Conference on Parliamentary Democracy.
E-voting technology allows, for the first time, independent voting in public elections for millions of disabled and language minority voters through the benefit of a secret ballot. Efforts existed prior to the introduction of electronic voting to facilitate independent voting for the blind.
Frank
3 years ago
Neo-fascism
Doesn't this count as a change to our electoral act? How come it doesn't require 60% in a referendum?
morechatter
3 years ago
New Voter ID for Everyone
There are lots of low income residents who do not have the necessary ID and have no way of replacing it and often it takes them for ever to do so. They are struggling with the necessities of life like food and shelter, illness, etc. As far as voting again and again not likely as some identification is required that can establish your residency at the poles.
Why not ensure low income residents have access to ID replacement which is to costly for most to ensure they are not being discriminated against?
How can anyone live on the street?
How can the low income afford to survive?
How can they replace their costly ID?
How can they be without ID?
G West
3 years ago
The last thing we need is more technology
Voting happens once every 4 years at both the provincial and federal level.
We should never have moved away from door-to-door enumeration and the idea that we can't manage to count a few million ballots in each province a couple of times in four years is utterly absurd. Succumbing to the appeal of technology as a solution to everything is a dangerous tendency – one that’s actually got our society into the mess we’re in today in no small part.
Looking to the mess that technology has brought to voting in the United States ought to be enough to convince everyone that such trends work to disconnect communities from their own governance and enable the kind of machine politics which characterized the sponsorship scandal, the Mulroney payoffs and the current corruption of electoral financing in Conservative ranks…not to mention the manipulative way Gordon Campbell practices the game.
We need more doctors and more community centered health care - not a bunch of useless smart cards.
Even an nominal shill for the government like Vaughn Palmer realizes that Campbell is going too far.
I invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee
G West
realisticman
3 years ago
Technology will be coming
http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd[347]=x-347-559075
Implanted at birth, whether we like it or not, it's here:
http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd[347]=x-347-559094
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
You have such a cheery outlook. Its kind of like reading Orwell's 1984 from the other side.
Jack Robinson
3 years ago
Hot Button Muddle
While I admire this site's alternative perspective, especially in view of the Asper Broz hammerlock on free expression West o' the Pecos... this 'Hot Button' headline not only misrepresents the intent behind the Dion Liberals' valid electoral process concerns... but plays nicely into the Harper Hegemony government's Machiavellian manipulation of the dumbass, byte-befuddled electorate.
Given the unprecedented numbers of migrant, under-documented individuals servicing our kitchens, call-centres and corporate charnal houses currently here in Kanidistan... It strikes me that maybe a verifiable photo I.D. and proof of residency ain't such a bad idea... especially in the Vancouver boat-ramp polyglot, if only to rent a video or open a bank account.
And the Libs suggesting further caps upon third party organizational campaign funding... be it true-blue collar Joe Hill unionists or Tar Sands Zsar mugwhumps... can only serve to level the skewed chessboard of our deeply divisive, partisan regionalized political system.
Frank
3 years ago
Jack Robinson
I don't believe the article mentions Dion.
How? I assume because nobody having a voice is a better democracy than only the organizations with money having a voice?
Although I agree on the surface there will be no problem donating to political parties.
I just don't see how leaving our democracy to business-funded political parties and a business-friendly media improves things.
The new law does not make our system better.
G West
3 years ago
Realisticman
Neither link works.
About as effective as the Orwellian idea that any of this stuff is 'good' for anyone.
People can, and should, push back. There is no need for such utter nonsense which merely plays into the hands of the manipulative monsters who've got us to this pass already.
What's needed is more direct democracy, community organization and less overweening power militated not 'for' the public interest but in favour of special interests.
Especially in this province, the need is for all parties to give up the cash cow of corporate or union hegemony and return to the people for, and from whom, their power and responsibility emanates.
I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.
G West
realisticman
3 years ago
Links
Funny, the links don't work. That technology again!
Go to:
http://www.privacyinternational.org
On the right, in the Search box type in:
Identity Systems and Identity Cards
Click SEARCH.
Go to the third featured document and click on it's link:
PHR2006 - Privacy Topics - Identity Systems and Identity Cards
To see the other article on RFID technologies, go to the very bottom of the page and click on the red-linked;
PHR2006 - Privacy Topics - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
brian gough
3 years ago
have a gander at
Everyone if you would like to have a pleasent surprize read vaughn palmers vancouver sun column today, also have a gander at michael smyths column in the vancouver province today!
something happening at canwest global(bc liberal blood in the water)
Canwest global knows campbells goose is cooked!
and no I am not whacked out on gunga weed ,something been happening!
ME2
3 years ago
Brian
Keep on smokin' fella, 'round about Sept-Oct, after yer convinced they're really not so bad after all, they'll slowly shift back into Drive, and by December they'll be reminding us all of the dangers of "Communism",just in time for the election.
Works every time. LOL
Stump
3 years ago
the dangers of communism
governments who ignore economic reality in favour of ideology?
amorphous promises of a better future with no underpinnings of fact or reason?
autocratic leaders who brook no dissent?
Sounds like the dangers have already arrived.
Luke Skywalker
3 years ago
Moot Points?
While the proposed voter ID changes are a legitimate issue to be contested, at the end of the day are the issues raised in this article just moot points?
From today's Publiceyeonline:
... the New Democrats will be reduced to less than ten safe seats
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/003077.html#more
G West
3 years ago
Bernard Schulmann - not exactly reliable
Hardly an unbiased observer....
What did he predict for 2005?
I always invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.
G West
Luke Skywalker
3 years ago
Former New Democrat David Schreck Seems to Agree
Based upon the consistent BC public opinion polls...
Which would equate to around 17 New Democrat seats in the next election.
http://www.strategicthoughts.com/record2008/fedbyelections.html
Frank
3 years ago
Luke
It must make you very happy to read that a Neo-Liberal is predicting the victory of the Neo-Liberal party over the other Neo-Liberal party.
Yes, the state of democracy doesn't matter, all that matters is if the right-wing Neo-Liberal party beats the left-wing Neo-Liberal party for about the 15th time since WW2.
As long as that happens it wouldn't matter even if the Libs brought back the law saying only married men of property could vote.
vigilantz
3 years ago
Hypocrisy and a 'Fish to Fry'
While these types of duplicitous and hypocritical actions on the part of the B. C. Liberal government are regretable and should not really surprise anyone, they are small potatoes compared to the 'elephant in the room' in our municipal elections. I am, of course, referring to the use of electronic voting machines in our local elections, the government that, on a day-to-day basis, affects us the most. A story that, even with repeated nudging, The Tyee showed no interest in pursuing.
It is bad enough that there is at the very least a perceived conflict of interest when municipal councils appoint the people to run our local elections but when you couple that with the use of electronic voting machines, poor understanding of same by councils and most election officials (leading to ineffective election bylaws, glitches and security risks) there is cause for great concern.
The provincial government has set no standards with respect to electronic voting machines and the widely disparaged (and easily hackable) Diebold Accuvote-OS machines were used in 30 B. C. municipalities in the 2005 municipal elections. This is becoming a very large issue in the U.S and yet, in typical fashion, here in Canada, no one seems to be too worried. Is it really too much to ask that our election officials be impartial, our election bylaws be designed to prevent/detect fraud and our electronic voting machines be tested and certified so that our votes can be counted fairly?
For much more on this, go to http://www.blackboxvoting.org and http://www.bradblog.com
The Blackbird
3 years ago
An Invitation to Premier Campbell
I find it amusing that this pathetic little man could spend so much time in a dark little room with his pathetic little friends drafting a bill that none of them would have the guts to paraphrase, i.e., "Just shut up," in a face to face interaction.
I suggest he try it the next time he visits Vancouver. I invite him to stand on the corner of Main and East Hastings Streets for one hour and say those words to everyone who passes by. He'd be wise to book an appointment with his plastic surgeon for the next day.
I could rant on this for hours, but that's all I will offer. For, as Napolean Bonaparte said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
JIm
3 years ago
The slick million dollar
The slick million dollar marketing campaign unveiled by the unions is response to this issue shows why you need these rules.
The hypocrisy over this issue is hillarious. It's bad for any company to donate a few thousand to the Liberals. But a union can spend millions on a slick marketing campaign for the NDP and its alright.
Do you even listen to yourself?
G West
3 years ago
JIm
Pls check out the difference between the two pieces of legislation.
The NDP 3rd party advertising law was meant to apply in the 28 days prior to a general election.
If you'd taken the trouble to understand the Campbell bill you might have noticed it covers a 4 month period prior to a fixed election date: It is clearly an infringement upon freedom of expression.
Furthermore, the hypocrisy of the Campbell Party, in view of the role of corporations and corporate lobbyists in among its supporters is quite profound. In addition, the disingenuousness of Campbell and Oppal’s public defence of the bill as an attempt to prevent the horrors of an American campaign is risible.
The NDP is on record as being supportive of a move to ban all but individual contributions.
There is a not small difference.
The Campbell Bill is offensive - as unions and the press - among others - have noted.
DO you even read?
I always invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.
G West
Frank
3 years ago
JIm
That's why I love you JIm, hyperbole. Businesses support the Libs to a degree higher than any union spending yet you put your fingers in your ears and actually try to tell us unions outspend business.
Now that I've stopped laughing I applaud your worthy post and look forward to more as soon as you can pull the next chestnut out of your ass.
SharingIsGood
3 years ago
workers v corporate elite
To all possible Liberal shills: Jack, Luke, Jim, rikia etc.
In LaPointe's Mel Hurtig Tyee article (this week) we learn:
Heaven forbid any of the lowly working hordes band together and pay some of their three percent of the Canadian wealth pie to big businesses like Canwest-Global to show their side of the story. It just wouldn't be fair now would it. We can't possibly allow the working people to have a say in how they think things are being done or ought to be done. Why, it would be democratic! Heaven forbid!