FIXED ELECTION DATES MATTER UNTIL THEY DON’T
In 2011, Bill 21 was crucial to the security of Albertans. And it still is, writes Peter Bowal
“This is a government that keeps its word, Mr. Speaker.”
So began the debate by Premier Alison Redford on Tuesday, Nov. 22, 2011, on Bill 21 to fix Alberta election dates to every four years.
The premier continued: “Albertans want to know there’s going to be an election every four years. We think this legislation ... represents what Albertans want to see. They want certainty. They want security.”
Only three years after the last election, the same government needs to read its own legislation. Holding 70 of 87 seats in the legislature, the Alberta government is now signalling the next election will be called a year before scheduled. This is the first real test to see if the new fixed election law will prevail over political opportunism.
Sure, a strong majority government can do as it pleases. However, it’s worthwhile recalling the government’s own steadfast words rejecting election manipulation only a few years ago.
On the 88- word amendment, Attorney General Verlyn Olson vowed in the legislature: “The opposition will know years ahead of time when the election is coming, and they can do everything they need to do to prepare. Albertans, again, are not going to be prejudiced in any way.”
The new law would, he repeated, “provide for a fixed election time period and, thus, allow all of us to prepare for elections with greater certainty.”
On second reading, Olson again pledged the law “provided for a fixed election time period.”
He explained: “Currently the premier is able to choose the date of the general election ... A drawback of this approach is the perception that the chosen election date is purely political. This is not the perception we want the public to have. We want to inspire an even greater confidence in our electoral system, we want Albertans to trust in the integrity and fairness of the system.”
There’s more. The attorney general listed “a variety of other reasons for doing so,” mostly relating to cost savings and better election administration. He said: “To put it simply, speculation as to when an election will be held results in uncertainty. Fixed election periods would allow the government and the public service to work within clearly established time frames. We believe that this will allow for improved governance.”
As for the falling back on royal prerogative for the premier to call an election any time, the attorney general said: “The political consequences of asking the Lieutenant Governor to dissolve the legislature outside of the fixed period would discourage this from happening.”
He assured that fixed election dates “will lead to a greater public confidence in our electoral system ... provide transparency and predictability. By knowing when an election will be held, Albertans will be able to participate more easily and effectively.”
He closed the debate thus: “This important piece of legislation will create certainty for Albertans ... This act will provide for a fixed election time period for general elections to be held every four years.”
Not to be outdone on the virtues of certainty and political fair play, Kyle Fawcett, the current environment minister, entered the fray. After commending the premier for her leadership, he said: “It takes a lot of guts, courage and determination to change what has been a practice in this province for a hundred years. ... the intention of this Bill has to do with being fair and transparent with citizens, being fair and transparent with those that are putting forward their name to run for public office, and being fair and transparent to political parties, that are a big part of our democratic institutions.”
Fawcett continued, saying the “... biggest concerns have been with manipulation of the political process as far as the timing of the election ... a very unfair advantage to the governing party. This Bill prevents that from happening. I can think of millions of other scenarios. ... but this Premier ... believes in transparency and fairness to Albertans.”
To prove his point, he offered an outrageous scenario involving a former member of his party “who left to pursue an opportunity in federal politics. He became leader of the Canadian Alliance party federally, and as soon as he became Leader of the Official Opposition, I think three and a half years into a mandate, the then Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, called a snap election. That Leader of the Official Opposition could barely even get into his office, and he was into a campaign. That was unfair manipulation of the election process that I think was unfair to all Canadians.”
Adamantly declared Fawcett: “Again, this bill will not let that happen, Mr. Speaker. It’s fair, it’s honest, and ... we don’t know what’s going to happen four years from now, OK? We don’t know. ... Mr. Speaker, this provides the intent of what most proponents of fixed election dates want — manipulation of the timing of election, going out to five years, cutting it short at three and a half years.”
Democracy can survive fixed terms. In the first electoral cycle after the fixed date law, the Alberta government has returned to months of uncertainty about the next election.
The last words go to former premier Redford: “If the opposition is concerned about ensuring they have a head start, they can read the legislation to get ready for a provincial election. That’s democracy.”
This is the first real test to see if the new fixed election law will prevail over political opportunism.