Elections, schmelections
Let's draw names from a hat
"Apparently, a democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at great cost without issues and with interchangeable candidates."
American writer and critic Gore Vidal witnessed the same money politics that has come to Calgary.
If there were issues in the October 2001 municipal election, why was not a single incumbent alderman defeated? And the only noticeable difference between mayoralty contenders Bev Longstaff and Dave Bronconnier – aside from gender – was about $300,000.
That’s why the only election issue today is money. When average citizens shun participation, the vacuum sucks and the void is often filled by corporate special interests. It’s a common problem for democracies, and some municipalities have taken steps to deal with it.
In New York City, the local government has implemented a Campaign Finance Board (CFB) to make elections more fair. The CFB pursues its mandate by convening mandatory debates, setting campaign contributions and spending limits, and administering public matching funds to enhance donations given by average citizens.
"Its purpose is to level the political playing field by enabling all serious candidates, whether challengers or incumbents, to compete on more equal footing and to make candidates and elected officials more responsive to citizens, and to help credible candidates, who may not have access to "big money," run competitive campaigns," says the CFB Web site.
At least one high-profile candidate would like to see changes to limit campaign spending in municipal elections.
"It (running for office) is darned expensive. Everybody should have the ability to run. That bugs the heck out of me. There should be limits on spending," says Richard Magnus, third-place finisher in last year's mayoralty contest and current MLA for Calgary North Hill.
In the 2001 election, Mayor Bronconnier spent $834,881. This compares to $195,067 spent by his predecessor, Al Duerr, to secure victory in 1998.
Ironically, Magnus received the single largest donation to a candidate , $45,000, from Walton International Inc. Bill Doherty, head of Walton's Calgary office was unavailable for comment.
This highlights another issue – municipal election donations, unlike provincial and federal, are not given tax-reducing benefits.
"There is no deduction for contribution at the municipal level," says Gord Luchia, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency spokesman. "They (contributors) should not be claiming contributions to municipal election campaigns."
Life is rough when you cannot claim a $45,000 contribution as a business expense.
When it comes to progressive election regulations, Calgary also lags behind Alberta’s capital. Edmonton's disclosure bylaw monitors election contributions and spending, disclosure of financial interests of councillors and their families, gifts and honoraria, and election surpluses.
In Calgary, seven of nine incumbent Calgary aldermen dove into last year’s election campaign with pre-existing campaign funds. Mayor Bronconnier went into the race with $54,848 in his kitty. His chief opponent, Longstaff, began the race with $34,076. The official campaign period was from October 20, 1998 to October 15, 2001.
Following the election, Ald. Dale Hodges topped his colleagues by squirrelling away $54,721 for a future campaign. He went into the campaign with a surplus of more than $30,000, raised almost $50,000 and, despite being acclaimed without challenge, spent nearly $25,000 – more than what numerous aldermen spent defending their seats against opponents.
Following the 1998 Calgary election, former mayor Al Duerr had a $34,000 surplus. Where did the money go? There is no law requiring Calgary candidates to publicly account for these surpluses.
In Edmonton, any surplus of total campaign contributions over expenses must be held in a trust account to be spent on the candidate's expenses in a future city byelection or general municipal election. If the candidate does not use the surplus for election expenses before the next general municipal election – for example, if they do not seek re-election – they must donate the amount to a registered charity within 60 days after that election.
The inability to accurately track contributions, expenditures and surpluses, and to carefully audit campaigns, is cause for concern. In the campaign finance disclosure statements filed by those who ran in the Calgary election, many campaign auditors reported that contributions are not susceptible to complete verification by audit procedures. Clearly, city hall disclosure statements are not as meaningful as they could be.
Unfortunately, that doesn't change when the campaign ends.
Unlike their Edmonton counterparts, Calgary councillors do not have to disclose their financial interests to the public, they do not have to disclose their land holdings, and they do not have to disclose the financial interests of their immediate family members.
Edmonton councillors must disclose this information and update their statements within 30 days of any change, similar to the provincial requirements for MLAs. This is designed to reduce conflicts of interest.
Calgary rescinded the Real Estate Registry bylaw in 2001. This registry, initiated by former mayor Rod Sykes in 1972, required council and top administration officers to reveal their real estate holdings. Although it was not as comprehensive as Edmonton's bylaw, it provided a small glimpse into potential conflicts of interest.
Now, once elected, there is very little in place to keep local politicians accountable. |
