Bill 20 an intrusion into the democratic process

Of all the legislation introduced by the UCP government since Danielle

Smith assumed power, Bill

20 may be among the most controversial - and it certainly has the potential to be the most concerning.

This bill, if passed in the legislature, will give the provincial cabinet sweeping powers to remove elected municipal officials without public transparency and it introduces - as a supposed pilot project - party politics to elections in Calgary and

Edmonton.

It allows the provincial government to overturn bylaws introduced by municipal governments for the benefit of their communities.

It is draconian, not just an overreach of provincial authority.

I find it interesting that during the 2021 Alberta municipal elections, there was outrage among some, especially conservatives given my own interactions, that NDP MLAs were endorsing candidates in Alberta communities. They were outraged that the NDP, including Lethbridge West’s Shannon Phillips, had the audacity to state support for candidates in civic elections.

Opponents were calling this a horrible intrusion into municipal politics, one that threatened the independence of civic government, and yet here we are 2.5 years later and we have a conservative government making that intrusion into law.

Why? What actual purpose does it serve?

This is a question raised by Wetaskiwin mayor Tyler Gandam of Alberta Municipalities earlier this week in a media event. Gandam bluntly expressed ABMunis’ opposition to Bill 20 and in doing so perhaps put a target on his back.

Which should raise concerns among voters who support any political party. Why should any municipal politician fear reprisal for supporting policies for their communities that don’t jibe with the political philosophies of the reigning provincial government?

If Lethbridge elects an openly NDP-friendly mayor and councillors in 2025, will they have to fear dismissal from the positions because Danielle Smith and cabinet oppose their political leanings?

Will Conservative-friendly mayors and councillors have to fear the same thing under an NDP government in the future?

Will cities and towns be prevented from enacting bylaws that reflect the needs and wants of their communities simply because the provincial government doesn’t like them?

Will media be impacted by these rules?

Being a journalist who has gone out of my way to be get along with all parties, this is concerning because any government has to expect scrutiny and criticism of their leadership and policies. It’s part of the democratic process.

Will media outlets who the UCP feels aren’t waving their flag be disallowed from media events, will they be left off press releases, will their ownership feel compelled to tow party lines to maintain their advertising base?

These are valid questions.

The UCP knows that more than 70 per cent of Albertans are opposed to partisan politics being introduced at the municipal level but it still is going ahead with Bill 20.

Can such a bill be challenged in court? Or with the federal government? Should it? Given the implications, I would say ‘yes’ to the latter.

Bill 20 appears to be a threat to existence of the democratic process in Alberta and even diehard members of the UCP need to oppose it because they and their party could be on the opposite end of it in the next provincial election.

How will they react then? Will they accuse the NDP of misunderstanding the bill’s intentions if that party removes UCP-friendly mayors and councillors or kicks to the curb laws aimed at enhancing the lives of residents in their own communities because they are perceived as right-leaning?

Like the interest of the UCP in creating an Alberta pension plan, Bill 20 is something nobody asked for and which no reasonable argument can be made for supporting.