Comments on: Campaign Finance Fuss (Bill 203)

By: Don Iveson :: Edmonton City Councillor, Ward 5

Don Iveson :: Edmonton City Councillor, Ward 5 — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 03:58:00 +0000

[...] so–is the province’s imposition on municipal autonomy. This territoriality came up when I discussed Bill 203 in May last year. To my eyes, incorporating the majority of our Disclosure Bylaw in provincial law is a testament to [...]

By: Don Iveson :: Edmonton City Councillor, Ward 5

Don Iveson :: Edmonton City Councillor, Ward 5 — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:58:16 +0000

[...] some background, see this blog post about Council’s ruminations on the Province’s Bill 203 from the [...]

By: Cyril

Cyril — Sat, 30 May 2009 00:01:47 +0000

“amend the constitution, suite of tax powers.”
Good lord no! I pick door # 2- prov. tax credit. I hope they make that change at least.

By: don

don — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:12:40 +0000

Great question, David. Quite right about credit vs. deductibility – useful clarification. I think a property tax credit could be administered as a last resort, but it would not necessarily be available to renters, which would be inequitable in my view. Instead, since we’re really creatures of the province (under the British North America Act and the Municipal Government Act) I think the credit should be issued by the province. Failing that we could amend the constitution to make municipalities equal orders of government unto themselves, give us our own suite of tax powers, and get right off the dependancy on provincial and federal grants (and attendant whim).

By: David Dorward

David Dorward — Fri, 29 May 2009 22:34:09 +0000

Don:
Regarding your thoughts on Bill 203 including a tax break, present contributions to provincial or federal parties or candidates are not “deductible” now. There is a tax credit available, which often times is better than a deduction. Further, the tax credit is only available in the applicable jurisdiction. So, a federal contribution has a federal tax credit and a prov contribution has a prov tax credit. I belive that it would be illogical to have either the federal or provincial government give a tax credit for a municipal campaign contribution. My question is would you support a property tax reduction for campaign donations made? That would more appropriately link the contribution with the tax source.
Thanks for the great work you are doing in the City.

By: Cyril

Cyril — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:23:04 +0000

I don’t think it should be called a “hassle” at all especially if one is committed to being a part of local government. It’s not a game, it’s serious business that goes on even in a village that requires this type of transparency.Municipal Government most directly impacts the lives of residents. I think you are devalueing your position as an elected official by not having some sort of responsibility\expectations when running for office.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:16:07 +0000

Don, this makes sense to me, since the average citizen does not get any in-depth coverage of the issues surrounding Bill 203 in the media. Thanks for taking the time to distill this debate for us!

By: Bill Given

Bill Given — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:56:24 +0000

Don, I don’t really have too much of a problem with the spirit of the bill (I’d judge that to be transparency) either. One of the things missed is the consideration of smaller municipalities and people who choose to stand as candidates there.

Think of someone standing for council in a village – they might have some contributions and they might have some expenses. Now they will have the extra hassle of having to keep these records for two years, whether they are elected or not. That’s kind of a pain – maybe not a big one but still it starts to introduce barriers to what used to be the easiest order of govt for people to participate in.

Also, the residency requirement seems a little annoying too. Do you have any relatives that live outside of Alberta? Would they support you in a campaign? If they did before they can’t (legally) now. Maybe not too much of a problem in Edm or Cgy but what about in Lloydminster (this could be a big problem there), or Hythe, or any other smaller municipality that lays near our provincial borders?

The bill could be fine, but there should have been consultation with the AUMA and AAMDC before going this far. As it stands, it’s a whim based on perceived problems in a very small number of municipalities.

By: bob

bob — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:51:53 +0000

Those of us who have been following Bill 203 from #yyc get it even though our Council didn’t have the courage or ethical will to step forward and design their own. I say (even with minor flaws) Bravo to Bill 203!