Oppal's Murky Method for Changing BC's Election Laws

The inspiration to tinker with how British Columbians elect MLAs came from a report by chief electoral officer Harry Neufeld, Attorney General Wally Oppal said earlier this week. But while some of the most controversial measures are not in Neufeld's report, the government ignored other recommendations meant to increase voter participation.

The changes are included in Bill 42, the Election Amendment Act. Introduced on April 30, it is among a group of bills that will be deemed passed at 5 p.m. on May 29, even if it fails to pass through all the normal stages of debate.

"What's happened now is the chief electoral officer came to us in 2006 and said the Elections Act has to be reformed and that amendments should take place," Oppal said. That report included 60 recommendations, he said. "We thought it was an appropriate time to re-examine the Elections Act."

Neufeld is an independent officer of the legislature, like the ombudsman or auditor general, responsible for running the province's elections in a fair and impartial way. Comparing his report, Chief Electoral Officer: Recommendations for Legislative Change, to Bill 42 reveals that while the government adopted about 35 of Neufeld's suggestions, they ignored another 14 or so.

Plus, the government added in changes to at least 28 sections that Neufeld did not suggest changing. Those 28 changes include the ones that are drawing criticism from groups across the political spectrum.

Ideas ignored

While the government agreed with many of Neufeld's suggestions and included them in the amendments to the Election Act, they failed to act on several others:

• Neufeld wanted Elections B.C. to be allowed to provisionally register people as young as 16 to vote, similar to how things are done in Australia. "The most effective means of registering youth may be to approach them in high school," he said. "Using the age of 16 would permit Elections B.C. to work with schools and the driver licensing program to ensure maximum exposure to the registration process for young voters." The registrations would not become active until the individual turned 18.
• The law requires a notice of election to be published in newspapers within 11 days of an election being called. The CEO said, "Newspaper publication is not always an efficient or effective means of communicating information to the public." He asked for discretion to use other means, such as householder brochures, direct mail or other media.
• Caregivers should be allowed to help all the people they are looking after mark their ballots if they need assistance, instead of just the one they are now allowed. "Residents of extended care facilities and group homes often have a unique relationship with their caregivers, who may be in the best position to communicate with the voters and assist them in marking their ballots," he argued.
• Election advertising on general voting day is illegal, but it is unlikely to be prosecuted, Neufeld said. He asked that he be allowed to apply an "administrative penalty" against such advertisers.
• Neufeld suggested that voter identification requirements be eased for people in medical or correctional facilities, "to only require one document with the voter's name, and permit the voter to make a solemn declaration as to their residential address.

Ideas added

In short, the Campbell government ignored provisions that would have made it easier to register young people to vote, help people in group homes and care facilities cast ballots and reach the many people who do not regularly read newspapers. At the same time they added in some ideas of their own that are generating controversy.

Those ideas include a move to limit third party advertising. The bill would limit groups to spending $3,000 in any one constituency, and not more than $150,000 across the province, in the five months before an election. Another section would require voters to have identification showing their name, photograph and address.

Other changes the Liberals made without Neufeld's advice include:

• Tripling the number of voters needed to nominate a candidate from the current 25 to 75
• Raising the nomination deposit made by candidates from $100 to $250
• Allowing political parties to spend up to $2.2 million in the 120 days before a 28-day campaign period, and another $4.4 million during the campaign
• Excusing money spent on fundraising during a campaign from being counted as an election expense, even if that fundraising fails to raise any money
• Prohibiting candidates from accepting contributions from federal political parties and electoral district associations
• Allowing any voter in a constituency, election officials or representatives of candidates to challenge a person's right to vote.

Fury building

On May 15 a coalition of eight unions and labour groups bought full page ads in B.C. newspapers and launched a website to fight the restriction on third-party advertsing. The ads included a picture of a woman with tape over her mouth and the words, "Gordon Campbell wants you to just shut up."

The Trial Lawyers Association of B.C., the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and business groups including the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association are also opposed to the change.

Various groups had earlier criticized the tightening of identification requirements. They include the BCCLA, the B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre and other poverty advocates. The requirement will make it more difficult to vote for the homeless, students and anyone who has recently moved, they said.

Attorney General Oppal was unavailable on May 16 to explain how it was decided which amendments to include.

"He must be ashamed of himself," said David Schreck, a former NDP strategist. Unlike other members of the government, Oppal would know the courts have already struck down similar laws against third-party advertising.

The changes the Liberals are making stack the election in the party's favour, Schreck said. "It's all partisan, isn't it?"

The advertising laws will likely be challenged in court, as will the identification requirements, but it will almost certainly take until well after the May 12, 2009 election for the issues to be resolved.

'Limit will skew elections further'

Democracy Watch coordinator Duff Connacher said some limits on third party advertising are reasonable, especially with a fixed election date. "It just makes sense because everyone knows the election is coming."

However, the limits should be set based on what advertising actually costs. The federal limits are the same as the proposed B.C. limits. That might or might not be appropriate, he said. On one hand, the B.C. law will cover a much longer period, five months instead of 35 days. However, ads are likely cheaper in the province than they are in national media.

It's not fair to call the limits "gag" laws, he said. Groups can still get their messages out through news releases, letters to the editor, e-mails, newsletters, events, rallies and websites. "None of that is limited," he said. "It's just a limit on paid advertising."

Also, he said, the limits should not be put in place without also limiting donations to political parties. While many unions have bylaws that restrict donating to parties, corporations often have a few directors making decisions about how to donate shareholders' money. The corporations will likely respond to advertising limits by giving even more money to the Liberal party, he said, allowing them to buy influence with the government.

"The limit will skew B.C. elections even further in favour of wealthy individuals and corporations," he said. "B.C. has the best government money can buy, mostly corporate money right now."

Related Tyee stories:

• Oppal Confused on Voter ID Law?
  AG calls tightened requirements a 'good move' but cites report that says opposite.
• Hot Button Bill: Libs Rush to Change Election Laws
  Diverse foes say Bill 42 would crimp free speech, hurt poor voters.


Read more: Rights + Justice, Politics, Elections