Premier Christy Clark鈥檚 decision to forgo her $50,000 annual stipend from the B.C. Liberal Party and her government鈥檚 proposal to require twice-monthly disclosure of political donations are steps in the right direction.
But they are baby steps when bigger, bolder steps are needed: Ban corporate and union donations and put a limit on personal donations. Otherwise, special interests will continue to wield an unhealthy influence in B.C. politics.
The B.C. Liberal Party has been topping up the premier鈥檚 salary for years, but that payment has come under increasing criticism as more attention is focused on the huge sums corporations have been donating to the Liberals and, to a lesser extent, the NDP.
Through the party stipend, the premier was benefiting financially from political donations 鈥� to the tune of 20 per cent of her annual income. That doesn鈥檛 look good, and it isn鈥檛 good.
Clark has heard the criticisms, and announced last week she would stop taking the stipend. She didn鈥檛 explain much, other than to say it 鈥渨as a distraction.鈥�
She said she will still claim expenses while on party business, which is fair 鈥� party leaders shouldn鈥檛 be out of pocket for expenses incurred while working for the party.
As for the huge donations, the Liberals keep insisting the public doesn鈥檛 really mind, that transparency is the key. To that end, they have been making public their donations every two weeks, and now want other parties to do the same. Finance Minister Mike de Jong announced this week a proposal to introduce legislation that would require the major parties to report their donations every two weeks through Elections B.C.
Transparency is good, and the public should know who is donating how much to whom, but what the public really wants is more restrictions on donations.
A poll commissioned last year by the Dogwood Initiative and conducted by Insights West suggests 81 per cent of B.C. Liberal supporters and 91 per cent of NDP supporters want an end to corporate, union and out-of-province donations, and they want it before the next election.
Polls are not always reliable, but even if that poll overstates the reality by 10 or 20 per cent, it鈥檚 clear a majority of British Columbians favour limiting political donations.
The Liberals don鈥檛 seem to be in tune with that sentiment, but the New Democrats are. NDP Leader John Horgan said he plans to introduce a private member鈥檚 bill in the next legislative session that would ban union and corporate donations, as his party has tried to do several times before. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver is of the same mind.
Clark says the alternative to B.C.鈥檚 wide-open political financing is to hit the taxpayers up for campaign funding, but why should it be an either/or situation? It is not up to the taxpayers to fund political campaigns, except as voluntary contributors to the parties of their choice.
It鈥檚 bad enough that tax credits for political contributions are substantially more generous than the credits allowed for charitable donations. Don鈥檛 compound that immorality with a worse one. The federal Liberals tried it in the mid-2000s, granting parties $1.75 for each vote they won. Stephen Harper鈥檚 Conservatives rightly phased it out. But federal parties get campaign expenses reimbursed, so they are still picking taxpayer pockets.
Banning (or substantially limiting) corporate and union donations and capping personal donations would mean parties would have to work harder to raise funds for getting their messages out. Politicians would have to convince more people of their merits.
The result of that could well be more confidence in our political system and less suspicion that big money buys elections.
