By-elections

The Green Party of BC will not be running candidates in the by-elections to be called in 2012. Because this decision seems to be of interest to some in the media, I thought an explanation might be in order.

There are all kinds of reasons we might not want to participate in by-elections. As a party that believes in evidence based decision-making, we now have data based on the four by-elections in which we have participated: the 2011 by-election in Vancouver Point Grey (3.42%); the 2008 by-elections in Vancouver Burrard (5.37%) and Vancouver Fairview (7.35%); and the 2004 by-election in Surrey Panorama (8.37%). With the exception of Surrey Panorama, the percentage of support for Green Party candidates in the by-elections is substantially lower than we receive in those same ridings in provincial elections. On evidence, therefore, that might be reason enough to take a pass on future by-elections unless there is compelling counter evidence that the outcome could be different.

Some wonder if not participating in by-elections will mean that the Green Party will be seen to be slipping off the electoral map. The paradox with that opinion is that after each by-election where our vote goes down, the media and political commentators draw that very conclusion. To counter that perception is the reality that in all provincial elections subsequent to our participation in by-elections, with the exception of Surrey Panorama, our vote percent returns to previous levels or higher.

The most compelling reason for not participating, however, relates to the fact that a small party like ours is punished financially for participating in this most fundamental of democratic processes. I don’t know whether it is in the Election Act or in the regulations that accompany the act, but if a party participates in a by-election and it has received $10,000 in income by the by-election date, the party must submit audited financial statements to Elections BC within 90 days of the election date. Even if the campaign itself falls well short of the $10,000 threshold for audits, the party must be audited. Even if the party’s year over year revenue is similar, the party must pay for an audit. The Green Party of BC believes the audit requirement and the expense and staff time consumed is punitive to smaller parties and subverts the intent of parliamentary elections.

I understand the need for audits, especially of the two main parties that regularly spend the maximum in campaigns and use their party machinery to get campaign funds and often support the candidate with direct transfers. The Green Party gladly pays for and submits its annual audit. But there seems to be an element of common sense missing in the application of the “rules” to a party that doesn’t shovel money into candidates' campaigns. It seems to me a quick look at the unaudited books would provide sufficient assurance. Maybe the trigger for that look should be when the candidate’s campaign has passed the threshold for an audit.

Another reason for not participating in the 2012 by-election is that it takes energy and resources away from our campaign plan for 2013. We have very focused goals for 2013: get organized on the ground in key ridings, raise enough money to operate the party and to mount a credible campaign, and, run great candidates everywhere. Everything we do is directed toward those three goals. The by-elections do not fit the plan.

There are other ways that the Election Act or the regulations imposed by the legislature punish small parties. I would hypothesize they are in fact designed specifically to put barriers in place to discourage participation. One is the candidate deposit. In both Ontario and Canada, courts have ruled that the candidate deposits are unconstitutional. We approached the Attorney General with this information in the hopes that we would not have to resort to legal action. The Green Party in Prince Edward Island was successful in having their candidate deposits removed based on the Ontario and Canadian rulings.

Almost two years later, we have received occasional correspondence that the government is reviewing the issue - usually prompted by an inquiry from us - but there is no indication that action will be taken.

And to emphasize how petty the requirements can be, we only need to look to our 2011 year-end mailing. When Elections BC found out we were sending out a bumper and bike sticker (a 30 cent value) with the letter, they wanted to look at the letter to ensure it didn’t violate some regulation or other. It didn’t which is good because the letter was already in the mail.

So we give our members a 30 cent thanks for their support and get questioned. And yet the BC Liberals can take tens of thousand dollars from their corporate backers and the BC NDP can get hundreds of thousands from their union supporters, no questions asked!

Even without electoral reform, much could be done to make election rules more democratic.