‘THE EBY’ STEERS VOTERS INTO ELECTORAL REFORM
Columnist recaps year of developments in path toward another referendum
The NDP drive to bring proportional representation to B.C. — the story so far:
• July 18, 2017: Premier John Horgan appoints Attorney General David Eby to draft enabling legislation for a referendum where New Democrats and Greens will campaign “strongly in favour” and “actively in support of the agreed-upon form of proportional representation.”
The first challenge is to find a way to fudge Horgan’s election-time promise of a single yes/no ballot that would pit the status quo system of first past the post against a single alternative for proportional representation.
• Oct. 4: Eby tables a bill with the needed escape hatch for the premier, “structured so that a ballot with more than one question could be accommodated.”
The bill provides no minimum threshold for turnout. Nor is there a separate approval threshold for the North and/or the Interior, allowing more heavily populated regions to outvote the parts of the province most likely to lose local constituencies under proportional representation.
By an amazing coincidence, the New Democrats hold only four seats in the North and the Interior; their Green allies, none.
The most artful part of the bill encourages the Greens to keep the New Democrats in power another four years. If the referendum approves proportional representation, the changeover won’t happen before July 2021. If the Greens bring down the government before that, the election would take place under the status quo.
• Nov. 3: Eby recruits a quartet of academic advisers to help shape a questionnaire to engage the public on the coming referendum. Only one is on record as favouring first past the post and they are kept on a tight time frame ( just two weeks for feedback) and a short leash. If contacted by the news media, they are told to “please refrain from commenting on the specific advice you provided and whether that advice was followed.”
• Nov. 23: Eby takes the wraps off the questionnaire, which subtly and not so subtly leans in favour of proportional representation.
The government has already announced that Eby “will act as an independent official and refrain from engaging in debate.” Plus the premier has now named him to “serve as a neutral arbiter throughout the process.”
• Nov. 29: Eby manifests a flexible definition of what it means to “refrain from engaging in debate.”
Fielding questions about the referendum in the legislature, he blasts the Opposition B.C. Liberals for their own referendum practices that were “amateurish,” “stupid,” “immoral,” “racist” and “hypocritical.”
While insisting “I don’t want to get into partisan political talk,” he also accuses them of licensing “transnational money laundering ” and “a 9,000 per cent overrun” on the ICBC accounts.
Granted, the Liberals have made themselves a targetrich environment, not least by proposing their own referendum on electoral reform in a desperate, failed bid to save themselves after the last election.
So Eby’s comments were all in a day’s work for one of the most able partisans in the house. But not precisely what one would expect from a supposed “neutral arbiter.”
• April 19: The B.C. Liberals have discovered, via an access-to-information request, that the political staff in Eby’s office were involved in crafting the questionnaire.
He doesn’t deny it: “Certainly, I agree that I have political accountability for the questionnaire, for the referendum process. That is the job that the premier has given me. I accept that responsibility.”
But he again drops the pose of neutrality, saying “I will not be lectured” by the Liberals, given their myriad sins on an earlier referendum on treaty rights.
• May 30: Eby releases his recommendations for the fall-ballot-by-mail on electoral reform. His report confirms that the public-engagement process produced “no consensus on the ballot structure” and “no apparent consensus respecting which voting systems should appear on the ballot.”
But that’s no obstacle for someone with Eby’s determination.
He concocts a two-step voting process. The first ballot pits first past the post against an undefined version of proportional representation — “an apples to oranges comparison” between “a specific voting system and a concept,” to quote a reservation expressed in his own report.
Presuming the first ballot succeeds in dispatching the status quo, a second ballot in the same mail-out would invite voters to choose among three versions of proportional representation handpicked by Eby.
Two of the three are “not currently in use” anywhere, minimizing the risk of embarrassing comparisons to what happens in other jurisdictions.
Even with the one option in widespread use — mixed member proportional — Eby recommends keeping the public in the dark about the implications. He’d leave a dozen considerations to be decided after the referendum, by a legislature committee with an NDP- Green majority.
The neutral arbiter having done much to boost the chances for proportional representation, it came as no surprise this week that the cabinet endorsed all of his recommendations.
The question is a simple one, Premier Horgan insisted Thursday: “Do you want to keep what you have or try something different?”
As for those who might wish more detail about the trio of alternatives, the premier suggests consulting the internet.
“The Google is an extraordinary thing,” said Horgan. “You can find out a lot of stuff on your laptop. Those citizens who want to inform themselves about the variety of electoral options will do that.”
Those not inclined to consult “the Google” need only take the word of the premier’s go-to guy, namely “the Eby.”
The Google is an extraordinary thing. You can find out a lot of stuff on your laptop. JOHN HORGAN, premier