BC: Local government is our servant, not our master

In May, when a B.C. task force released its recommendations to improve local government elections, one recommendation that didn't get much attention was to increase the length of time local politicians stay in office from three years to four. Although having to ask voters less often for their support might be great for local politicians, it's bad news for local citizens.

The B.C. provincial government struck the Local Government Elections Task Force in 2009 to find ways to improve the electoral process for municipal elections in B.C. Task force members included three provincial politicians and three Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) members. But UBCM is a lobby group that represents the interests of local politicians and was able to use its position on the panel to support its own recommendations. Some, such as campaign contribution limits and the corporate vote received a fair bit of attention. However the recommendation to increase the length of the election cycle flew under the radar screen.

UBCM has lobbied long and hard to give local politicians an extra year of job security. In the 1980s, it was UBCM that lobbied to increase the election term from two years to three. Since 2007, it has been actively lobbying the provincial government to extend the election term by yet another year. So the recommendation for a longer election cycle came as no surprise.

How does a local government lobby group justify an extra year of pay, perks and power?

UBCM claims holding elections less often will save money. Nice to know local politicians occasionally look for places to save taxpayer's hard-earned dollars. But who really benefits with fewer elections? It's the politicians, not the taxpayers.

UBCM claims a longer term will give local politicians more time to learn the ropes. Yet, according to CivicInfo BC, of the 1195 local government officials elected in 2008 (including mayors, councilors, trustees and regional district) only 18 per cent reported 'no experience.' Frankly, with 82 per cent getting re-elected, this excuse just doesn't hold water.

UBCM also says that other provinces have four-year terms, so we should too. Since when does the excuse 'everyone else is doing it' make something right?

There is other bad news. Because there is no ability to recall municipal politicians, it is virtually impossible to remove a politician from office mid-term.

For example, in 2008 the mayor of Port Coquitlam was charged with a criminal offense. He was sentenced to a one-year conditional sentence and 18 months probation. Port Coquitlam councilors asked him to resign, but he refused. A longer term would have kept him in office even longer, leaving local citizens with questionable representation.

Moving from a three to a four-year term is a big mistake. It lets politicians hang around in office even longer without seeking the approval of voters. Local government is supposed to serve citizens, not itself. To enhance accountability, local politicians need to face voters more often, not less. There is no legitimate justification for the provincial government to increase the election term.

You can make your views known by contacting the Minister of Community and Rural Development, Ben Stewart, at 250-387-2283 or ben.stewart.mla@leg.bc.ca

By: Maureen Bader
Posted: July 16, 2010
Topic: British Columbia

Contact the regional director Jordan Bateman for further information.

Type: Commentary

Join Us | Donate

Forward page to friend

Comments

Mon, 2010-07-19 12:41 — An Anonymous Taxpayer

Four-year municipal terms

Bad Idea!!

The proposed four-year term for municipal politicians is an enormously bad idea, from many perspectives. I have been a four-term mayor and have also served as a councillor on several occasions and I am horrified that this atrocious proposal has been slipped in at the end of a meaningless, self-serving review. Nobody asked those of us outside the cozy circle of currently elected officials how we viewed the current election process.
When Bill VanderZalm ( then premier) and Rita Johnston ( then Minister of Municipal Affairs) scrapped the annual election and overlapping two-year terms, they robbed the citizens of BC of a valuable annual accounting and stewardship requirement by local councils. Now, with the three-year term and no enforcement of the Community Charter requirements, the level of arrogance and contempt by local councils is unprecedented in BC. Sitting pretty with a three-year sinecure, they just don't give a fig about voters until the 34th month of their 36 month term.
It has also become increasingly difficult to get good candidates to volunteer for the three-year term where they might have made a two-year committment. The four year committment is a further dicouragement to candidates, which will further damage the quality of our councils.
Instead of a four year term, a real reform and improvement would be a return to annual elections and overlap which helps with continuity, as opposed to sweeping council changes which happen with three-year terms.
The annual elections were very economical and cost effective as they were a standard part of municipal life and just a routine responsibility instead of the big, expensive production they have now become every three years. I would argue that they were much better run in the past as we did it every year.

We should be exercising the democratic muscle more often, not less often. Municipal elections are the foundation of our democratic system and need to be strengthened, not weakened by this foolish, four-year proposal.
Yours
John Allen , Harrison Hot Springs. .

Mon, 2010-07-19 12:29 — An Anonymous Taxpayer

The Province M. Bader article and Scott Young

Ms. Bader:

Having spent six and a half years involved in Port Coquitlam politics, I was not surprised that the "reform" was to extend the Council term.

Why I am e-mailing you is to correct your understanding of what occurred in the Scott Young affair. City Council claimed that they had requested that he resign but, if they did so, the request was not at a public meeting. Both Tony Chong, the Chief Administrative Officer of Port Coquitlam and I were at the hearing at the Main Street court house where the Crown informed the judge that if Scott Young's former wife Carol was required to testify she wanted police protection. At the subsequent City Council meeting, the press asked members of Council to comment on the hearing; they said they had no knowledge of the hearing as Mr. Chong had told them the hearing was under a publication ban.

Scott Young came close to being returned to Council in the last election. Because I am the only person in Port Coquitlam who has consistently opposed Scott Young, my attitude to him is important to his supporters. The reason I tell you all this is because there is support to bring him back and I have been approached to learn what I shall do. So this is not the past.

Patrick Alambets.

Post new comment

Canada's Federal Debt

This option will not work correctly. Unfortunately, your browser does not support inline frames.

Your Share

The federal government is adding $88 million a day to our debt. At this rate, the $105-billion in debt repayment between 1997 – 2008 will be wiped out this year. Support our campaign for a federal balanced budget law and help us STOP this clock.

View Debt »