Go for wards, not backwards on October 16

All politics is local.

— Thomas "Tip" O'Neil, former
Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives

There are an enormous number of good reasons for Vancouver citizens to vote yes to wards on Saturday (October 16). They include: providing direct, accountable representation by a councillor responsible to each city neighbourhood; giving minority groups a fairer chance for representation at city hall; dramatically reducing the importance of big money and political parties in civic elections; and ensuring all parts of Vancouver are equally important in decision-making, not just where the wealthier residents live.

And although some Chicken Little arguments from the "no" campaign make it appear that wards are an untested electoral experiment, the fact is that just about every major Canadian city but Vancouver has a ward
system, including Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Halifax, Regina, Saskatoon, and Calgary.

But another important reason to vote for wards that hasn't been discussed is that it could also improve the quality of our provincial and federal electoral representation.

And the lessons learned through seeing a successful ward system in Vancouver could easily spread to all other large cities in British Columbia, improving both local politics and citizen involvement in other levels of government.

How? Currently, winning an election for councillor or mayor in Vancouver's "at large" system is a daunting task, requiring enormous financial resources and big-party backing.

But under a ward system, more and--dare one suggest--better candidates could run and win because the financial and organizational requirements to win a ward are much less demanding than in a city campaign.

That would mean two positive things for provincial and federal politics. First, people interested in public service could more easily enter politics at the local- government level. Second, if they prove successful at representing their ward in the city, the next logical step would be to move to the provincial or federal level, building on their experience and community knowledge.

It's not that this doesn't happen to some degree already. Many provincial and federal politicians today were previously councillors or mayors. But even getting to the municipal level is a daunting task, and nowhere more so than in Vancouver.

Think about it: to win a citywide vote requires a councillor to get about 40,000 or more votes, and it doesn't come cheap. That means expensive public-opinion polling, significant advertising, a large number of door-knocking and telephoning troops, and an effective election-day team to get out the vote, not to mention giving up your day job, funding research on policy positions, et cetera.

All to win a three-year job that pays $50,932.39 annually.

That has meant that the funding for successful candidates has for the most part come from big business, particularly the development industry and other businesses dependent on city government decisions for their success. It has consequently meant the election of a succession of right-wing, pro-development Non-Partisan Association governments in Vancouver, with the current Coalition of Progressive Electors majority being an anomaly not previously ever seen.

For its part, COPE has primarily been funded by labour unions, particularly those representing municipal workers seeking some balance against NPA majorities.

A ward system would change all of that considerably.

"Wards allow someone to come forward on a limited budget without party support," Mayor Larry Campbell said in an interview with the Georgia Straight. "Community activists can get into politics--$5,000 and you're in, if that. It allows you to compete on a level playing field. And it allows people to move up to federal and provincial politics. It opens up the whole avenue of democracy."

Kennedy Stewart, a Simon Fraser University political scientist, agrees with Campbell.

"In an at-large system, you have to appeal to the entire city instead of one neighbourhood," Stewart, an expert on civic politics, told the Straight. "You have to appeal to 500,000 people instead of 50,000. It costs $1 to $2 per voter to run a campaign, and in the last election both major parties spent about $1 million each."

Those financial requirements tend to distort democratic representation, Stewart said. "Currently, at-large systems with no election-expense limits means mostly developer-supported candidates have the ability to run and win," Stewart said. "Councils, with few exceptions, are dominated by people who are pro-development and pro-expansion."

Look at the political composition of most municipal councils in B.C. and it's hard to argue. The at-large system favours candidates who can raise the most money, and surprise, surprise: they just happen to be right-wing and business-oriented.

But even right-wingers should support wards, because more representative city councils would also be more representative of different business interests as well. And right-wing politicians who might ably represent their community's views but lack big money and major party support are as unlikely to win election as centre or left candidates.

Stewart also agrees with the mayor that a ward system in Vancouver would give city politicians a better opportunity to advance to provincial and federal politics.

"Municipalities are often seen as farm teams for upper levels of government, and it's a good thing, because they get the experience needed," he said.

So there you have it: more reasons to vote yes to wards on October 16. And don't let other people decide how your city will be governed--you can register and vote in just minutes. See www.city.van
couver.bc.ca/ for details. *

Bill Tieleman is president of West Star Communications and a regular political commentator on CBC Radio One's Early Edition. E-mail him at weststar@telus.net.