Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Elections BC imposes absurd $3.2 million fine on BCGEU in bizarre censorship move

Elections BC's Dangerous Censorship

Outrageous $3.2 million fine levied on BCGEU shows big problems in election advertising laws.

Bill Tieleman’s 24 hours/The Tyee column

Tuesday August 28, 2012

"As to the evil which results from a censorship, it is impossible to measure it, for it is impossible to tell where it ends."
- Philosopher Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832
Does freedom of speech end when an election starts?
Is it permissible to impose censorship on public debate for the entire province when by-elections are held in just two of 85 ridings?
And is a penalty of $3.2 million and a ban on running any advertising in the 2013 provincial election a fair way to punish even an inadvertent, momentary transgression of highly debatable rules that are inconsistently applied?
Those are the questions a B.C. Supreme Court justice will have to answer after Elections BC imposed a shocking $3.2 million fine on the B.C. Government and Service Employees Union for allegedly violating rules severely limiting advertising, during two recent by-elections.
The case is far more important than for just its potentially devastating financial impact on the BCGEU, which is appealing the decision in court, because it could seriously censor all organizations' ability to communicate with the public during the next election.
The facts behind Elections BC's decision to levy a massive fine make no sense at all.
The BCGEU was running television ads this spring to support its bargaining for a new contract with its employer, the provincial government. Watch one at the top of this article.
When B.C. Liberal Premier Christy Clark called two by-elections on March 22, the BCGEU contacted Elections BC to ask if the independent body would regard ads already being broadcast as "election ads" under legislation that severely restricts advertising during a vote.
Yes indeed they would, came the word back via email from Elections BC just before 5 p.m. on Friday, March 23. It was overlooked until Tuesday, at which point BCGEU pulled all advertising across B.C.
The ads are straightforward and do not mention any political party. In them, BCGEU members telling viewers that: "a decade of falling behind from government cuts and wage freezes has hurt us and the services you rely on."
But under B.C.'s ridiculously punitive Election Act, elections ads are those that "...promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, a registered political party or the election of a candidate, including an advertising message that takes a position on an issue with which a registered political party or candidate is associated."
That pretty much means anything worth talking about!
Weird math
And the limits on spending are extraordinary: a maximum of $3,000 in one riding and $150,000 across the province in total.
A limit of $3,000 during the election campaign period would mean a business, union, non-profit or group of citizens could maybe buy a small ad in a newspaper at the most -- leaving all other advertising to political parties.
The penalties are extraordinary as well: a fine of 10 times the amount overspent by any advertiser.
Elections BC also bizarrely ruled that even though there were by-elections in just two ridings, with the entire BCGEU ad budget at $280,000 for the whole campaign, the union overspent the $3,000 limit by over $159,000 in each riding. The $318,000 total is more than the actual campaign cost.
So take $159,000 times two, then multiply it by ten and presto -- you owe us $3.2 million!
Calling it absurd doesn't even begin to describe this case.
BCGEU spokesperson Chris Bradshaw said in a Sunday interview that the union will argue in court that Elections BC erred in calling the campaign "elections ads," was wrong in calculating the fine and imposing it despite BCGEU consulting them and withdrawing the ads promptly.
"It means essentially that our ability to communicate with our members, the public and taxpayers is severely limited," if the legislation and fine are upheld, Bradshaw said.
One doesn't have to be a union supporter to see that businesses, non-profits or citizens who want to speak their mind during the next election would also be silenced if this draconian law and ruling aren't tossed out.
Could Mothers Against Drunk Driving ads be subject to these rules?
Why not? Elections BC could easily argue that since the B.C. Liberals introduced tougher laws on drinking drivers, the ads promote "a position on an issue with which a registered political party or candidate is associated."
Highly selective prosecution
But don't expect any changes from the B.C. Liberal government to return some sanity to election advertising.
When the B.C. Liberals desperately wanted the Harmonized Sales Tax to pass a binding referendum last year, they exempted that vote from not only any spending limits but even basic financial disclosure rules.
The government spent at least $6 million and big business supporters in the Smart Tax Alliance an untold amount of millions more, knowing that Fight HST -- the group I helped create -- had a budget of less than $300,000 by comparison.
And on the BCGEU case, Chilliwack backbench B.C. Liberal MLA John Les not only pilloried the union but couldn't resist a little prevarication too.
"The BCGEU had a choice to pull their ads in support of the NDP. Instead, they decided the rules didn't apply to them," Les said, ignoring the fact that the ads were about their contract negotiations, that the union consulted Elections BC about those rules and did pull the ads shortly thereafter.
The BCGEU points out that its ads were already on air when the by-elections were called.
"We don't know when they're calling a by-election -- we pulled the ads as soon as we read the Elections BC email," Bradshaw says. "But you can't just flip a switch and them off air -- it takes awhile."
And even former Elections BC chief electoral officer Harry Neufeld admitted when the advertising rules were introduced that "in some cases it can be difficult to determine if an activity is election advertising."
No kidding!
The next question is who else will be investigated and fined by Elections BC, because the BCGEU wasn't the only organization running advocacy advertising during the same period, just the only one being punished.


People like me work across B.C. taking care of your children, looking after your elderly parents and everyone in between
We love the work we do and have done our share through tough times
But a decade of falling behind from government cuts and wage freezes
Has hurt us and the services you rely on
B.C. families can't afford to keep going backwards. It's time funding for services and wages kept up.
Time to start moving forward again
A message from BCGEU
Subtitles in text on screen:
She looks after your kids
He fights forest fires
She works to keep B.C. safe
He helps youth at risk
A message from BCGEU
Working together for all British Columbians


Anonymous said...

Former EBC chief was caught changing the rules to allow his wife to travel at taxpayers expense. Craig James is no longer with EBC. Hogs in the trough.

Anonymous said...

Right anon 8:54.

However, Elections BC is a part, of this evil BC Liberal government. They are permitted to steal from the people, for their wives travel expenses. No-one will ever forget, the dirty tactics they used, when we opposed the HST. This is just another of those dirty tactics and dirty politics, the BC Liberals have used for over a decade, to steal from us. Hell, we even pay for the BC Liberals, nail salon beauty visits.

I think the money that was thieved from our tax dollars, to pay the legal fees of the two patsies, who took the fall for Campbell's theft and corrupt sale of the BCR, is more than ample. Even the BCR priceless Real Estate that was thieved and sold as well, is even far more than ample to cover that bill. Christy knows all about that corrupt theft and sale of the BCR. She was right there, when the theft was plotted by Campbell.

I really think. Christy should permit Elections BC, to take that money, that was thieved from the tax payers. If Christy wants to have Campbell thrown in prison, for his thefts. We will even take that as payment.

Anonymous said...

I would hope that Bill, in consulting with his associates within the NDP to change the law will abstain from critical comment about third party advertising in the election following a probable victory in 2013.

A person has to be a bit of a turned off mind not to see that the BCGEU was obliquely supporting the election of the NDP in the by-elecitons, since the BCGEU's bargining position does not have any direct affect on citizens (the services would still be there regardless of the BCGEU's collective agreement outcome). The BCGEU does second help to the NDP and they are always telling the membership who is "labour" or "working British Columbian" friendly and "we suggest you consider supporting these candidates".

If the NDP decides to loosen off the restrictions on third party advertising, I would hope Bill here would not squeal too loudly about third party ads coming from business associations, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation or the Independent Business group.

Elections are about electing a group of people who will bring goverance to all British Columbians either left or right or centre, and not just the membership in the BCGEU.

kootcoot said...

It is pretty clear that neither Elections BC, nor Elections Canada are "non-partisan." Hopefully the BCGEU will prevail in court, it wouldn't be the first time that BC LIEberal policy failed the legal test, even with the courts being suspect themselves (ie the BC Rail pretend trial).

It was pretty clear whose butt Craig James was covering in the HST debacle and this action against the BCGEU just continues the fight for the crooks who still get to run Victoria for a few more months.

Elections Canada meanwhile succeeds in slapping the wrist of one Liberal MP, while ignoring, it would seem, complaints from over two hundred ridings, the $1050 cheques received by employees of Dean del Mastro's relative from five hours away from his riding and Americans freely working on Con campaigns.

We really need to request election observers from the UN in both BC and Canada. For us to participate in such exercises elsewhere is HYPOCRISY writ large!

Anonymous said...

That's a bit of a stretch, asking the UN for election observers.

You can request it, but they simply wouldn't waste the time as there's nothing wrong with the mechanics and democratic means of the vote (which is what they look for when requested to do so).

here's an idea koot. Why not become one yourself? Be a scrutineer for the NDP candidate in your area.

and Americans freely working on Con campaigns? I do remember when members of the Democrats came up to assist the NDP (and the BC NDP actually goes to Democratic campaigns). It's nothing new.

Also not new is NDPers from other provinces coming in to help and in one or two instances (one being Marc Elisen from back east), that eventually won them coveted posts on Crown Corporations. Elisen ended up with a high ranked spot with BC Hydro.

Anonymous said...

Courting is usually of several distinct varieties,
and selecting the grownup courting web website accordingly is crucial.
You can find world-wide-web-web sites which is likely to be intended for authentic courting,
which might stop outcome in associations. Then you happen to
be proceeding to uncover individuals that may possibly properly current
you a likelihood to go on casual dates, knowledge illicit affairs,
a solitary evening stands, no strings connection and more!
Inside operate you want for creating constructive that you just merely locate the ideal
romantic relationship express of affairs you then surely undoubtedly must opt for on the net internet web sites accordingly considerably quite.
Diverse net websites have distinct forms of persons searching for to socialize.

Here is my site webcam chat