Levelling the playing field in local elections or infringing on people’s democratic rights? Those were the opposing views of a motion considered by New Westminster city council on Monday night.
At its March 11 meeting, council considered a motion put forward by Coun. Daniel Fontaine to close “possible loopholes” in B.C.’s Election Act, as they pertain to municipal elections.
The motion, which was defeated by council, was drafted with the idea that it could be forwarded to B.C.’s Minister of Municipal Affairs so changes could be made to Local Elections Campaign Financing Act in time for the 2026 municipal election. The motion included several components:
- Any corporation, labour union or not-for-profit entity actively utilizing internal resources to promote an individual candidate or municipal elector organization within six months prior to the municipal election would be required to publicly record and report the total funds expended to Elections BC.
- This public reporting, by the respective corporation, labour union or not-for-profit entity would include items such as the estimated use of staff time, overhead costs and marketing/promotion activities, including those accessible to the broader public through social media.
- A maximum of $500 of resources would be allowed to be expended by a corporation, labour union or B.C.-based not-for- profit for the purposes of promoting municipal candidates or electoral organizations in British Columbia with their members or staff during an election year.
- Corporations, labour unions and not-for-profit entities are banned from pooling their resources, so as to effectively increase the maximum limit they can utilize, to promote and market a municipal candidate or an electoral organization.
- Only B.C.-based corporations, labour unions and not-for-profit entities are permitted to undertake the election related activities listed above, with all non-British Columbia-based entities being strictly prohibited from actively promoting a municipal candidate or elector organization.
Fontaine said he applauded the provincial NDP for making some “long-needed reforms” to elections, including cutting out corporate and union donations and eliminating the the ability for large cheques to be provided to political parties.
“What they did not do was they did not close this particular loophole,” he said. “So there is a huge opportunity for organizations behind the scenes to be supporting municipal candidates or municipal electoral organizations.”
Fontaine said there’s a massive loophole in the local financial act allowing organizations like labour unions, not-for-profits and corporations to actively engage in elections by providing resources and phone banks and doing a whole bunch of activities, none of which will be recorded during the final reporting out of the campaign.
“If a corporation wishes to use their resources to actively campaign and endorse a candidate, use all their internal resources, speak to their membership or their staff, etc. none of that information is recorded through Elections BC, and it can amount up to a lot of dollars,” he said. “And when you have political campaigns where people win by literally a few hundred votes, as we just saw in the municipal byelection for the school trustee, a few hundred votes can make a huge difference in terms of who wins and who loses.”
Private message
Coun. Paul Minhas supported the motion put forward by his fellow New West Progressives councillor.
At Monday’s council meeting, Minhas read out a message he received from a local CUPE member prior to the last civic election – a message he said demonstrated why it’s so difficult for independent candidates to run in civic elections in New West.
In the message, the CUPE worker (whose name Minhas did not reveal) said “the unions usually do quite a bit of mobilizing with members during elections” so the union locals are a “good place” for worker-friendly candidates to get support.
If a union local decides to support a candidate, they will put resources into supporting the candidate through phone banks to members, emails to members, etc., said the employee.
“If a candidate has values that align with the unions, they can be a big support to candidates,” said the worker’s message to Minhas. “Essentially then want to support candidates who will hopefully not vote for things that hurt workers and who have progressive values.”
In the 2022 civic election, the New Westminster and District Labour Council endorsed five of the seven candidates who were successful in their bids for seats on city council: Mayor Patrick Johnstone and councillors Ruby Campbell, Tasha Henderson, Jaimie McEvoy and Nadine Nakagawa. (They all ran with the Community First New Westminster electoral organization, but Nakagawa is no longer a member of that group.)
The New Westminster Progressives formed in 2017, in part due to challenges independent candidates were having when vying against labour-endorsed candidates for seats on city council and school board. Fontaine and Minhas are its first members to be elected to city council.
“Chill on free speech”
Henderson expressed concern that Fontaine’s motion would restrict community groups’ ability to identify candidates that share their values. She said that could include parent groups who may identify candidates prioritizing education in their platforms, PRIDE organizations that identify trans-inclusive candidates to their members, and cycling advocacy groups that survey candidates about active transportation issues.
Henderson said every piece of legislation she could find from across Canada that’s related to third-party election activity restricts public communications, but does not restrict not internal communications from to associations to their own members.
“This feels really reminiscent of what's happening around the restriction of free speech in Alberta, and I just do not want to see that kind of Alberta-style politics coming here,” she said. “But actually come to think of it, Alberta does not even restrict organizing in this way. Alberta has the most restrictive third-party rules for elections across the country, but communication to members is still permitted. So this would be asking to restrict speech and community organizing more than Alberta does.”
Henderson also expressed concern about a timeline included in the motion, saying Elections BC’s pre-campaign period begins 89 days before an election – exceeding the six month timeline proposed in the motion for recording and reporting of funds. She said that’s a long period of time for organizations that aren’t well-resourced to quantify work that’s been happening over six months and could discourage people from getting involved.
Campbell expressed concern the motion would discourage individuals from participating in a democratic process. With municipalities already experiencing a low voter turnout, she said it’s imperative that efforts be made to encourage the public to vote.
“We need transparency; we have that. But we don't need road blocks,” she said. “I think we need to find ways to encourage and inspire and engage people in the democratic process. I won't be supporting this motion as I believe it discourages individuals from participating in their democratic right.”
In response to concerns raised at Monday’s meeting, Fontaine proposed amendments to remove the $500 spending restriction and to change the six-month requirement for recording and reporting the use of funds for election purposes to 90 days.
While Fontaine’s amendments received some support from his council colleagues, the overall motion was defeated 4-2, with only Minhas and Fontaine voting in support.
“I don't think the amendments make any change to my take on this,” Johnstone said. “I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but it doesn't take much research to understand this motion is actually asking the province to do something that is a violation of the Charter of Rights, and I'm not going to ask them to do that. Especially because I don't truly understand the problem that we're trying to solve.”
Johnstone said the legislation already requires third-party sponsors and organizations to report spending they do in support of elections, something that’s explicit in the Local Elections Campaign Financing Act. He said what’s being proposed “goes a lot further” and would require in the community to register before they talk to their own members about an election.
Johnstone also expressed concern the motion could create some “increasingly absurd” situations. As an example, he said a person who owns a restaurant may not be able to hand out a campaign button to employee, without registering.
“The chill on a small community organization being able to take part in an electoral process is, frankly terrifying,” he said. “We need people more engaged in local government. We need people more engaged in talking … around elections. We need more of that, not less than that.”
Past reforms
In 2021, the province introduced changes to local election campaign financing rules that were designed to make local government elections more transparent and equitable for everyone. Changes included:
- Establishing a pre-campaign period that increases the length of time election advertising is regulated from 29 days to 89 days
- Limiting sponsorship contributions to $1,200 (to match the provincial campaign contribution limit set in 2017)
- Requiring elector organizations to register with Elections BC
- Providing Elections BC with new investigative tools to support investigations and additional penalties to fine people who do not comply with the new campaign financing rules
- Requiring elector organizations (civic or local political parties) to register with Elections BC and complete annual financial reports, as was required by provincial political parties
