Recently released reports of crazy spending in Vancouver’s 2011 civic election should trigger a serious call for spending limits and donor restrictions in municipal campaigns. Amazingly, there has been little reaction. Or maybe it’s not surprising, with 70% of the populace having already given up on even bothering to vote in most civic elections.
With unlimited election spending setting new records in the City of Vancouver and one individual donation pushing that category into a separate universe, is it surprising that voter turnout remains abysmally low and voter cynicism remains disturbingly high? What is the point in voting when a few big donors so dominate the process that it’s incomprehensible that council decisions are being made without their interests being foremost?
The most egregious distortion of democracy is developer Rob McDonald’s $960,000 contribution to the NPA’s $2.5 million campaign. It’s the culmination of an escalation of single-donor amounts that many thought had hit the heights of impropriety with John LeFebvre’s $170,000 donation to Vision in the 2005 election.
For all the concern about foreign donations to environmental groups, there is no restriction on foreign, out-of-province or out-of-jurisdiction donors to any politician in B.C.
As a percentage of total campaign spending, 11 unions’ contributions to the Committee of Progressive Electors made up a whopping 79% of that party’s $360,969 campaign. That’s $280,000 aimed at getting people elected who set the pay rates for unionized city workers.
The union representing city workers threw $185,000 at Vision Vancouver’s $2.2 million campaign, an amount that will end up having far more impact than McDonald’s massive tally because Vision has the power to deliver something. Union contracts come due this term.
McDonald has to settle for thanks from the NPA’s two council members (and five other elected candidates). Vision’s 22 corporate donors who gave more than $20,000 will expect a little more than thanks.
To put this into perspective, Integrity B.C. executive director Dermod Travis points out in an article in The Tyee that in the 2009 Montreal election the biggest donation to a mayoralty campaign was $1,000. In Toronto it was $2,500. In Calgary, $5,000. All those cities have caps on donations. For a reason.
If city councillors in any Lower Mainland municipality had to excuse themselves every time a decision involving a significant donor came before council, they’d have trouble making quorum for most meetings.
Do people think this is all just fine? No. A 2010 Mustel poll found 66% of British Columbians thought unions and corporations should be prohibited from donating money to local government campaigns. Even more (74%) thought there should be limits to how much one person can donate.
Local politicians themselves are unhappy about all this. Vancouver council has unanimously requested changes such as donor limits for individuals, unions and corporations, spending limits for candidates, a ban on foreign donations and ongoing donation disclosures.
The power to fix this rests with the provincial government. Its Local Elections Task Force agreed on spending limits but dragged its feet getting them in place for the 2011 election and still hasn’t worked out what they will be. And it ignored two other crucial changes needed: a ban on corporate and union donations and a limit on individual donations. Perhaps the province is afraid that voters would expect the same rules to apply provincially
The only good news in all this is that big spending doesn’t always win. Green Party candidate Adriane Carr spent $9,475 and won a seat. COPE spent $360,969 and won one seat – on the school board.
Failure to address over-the-top municipal contributions from unions, corporations and individuals will only add to the cynicism and disillusion undermining our political processes. •
