We the signed, call upon the Province of British Columbia to require through law that all elected officials in local government recuse themselves on zoning votes when the decisions concern the direct interests of their campaign donors involved in development and real estate.

Such law(s) should:

1. Also prevent elected officials in local government from voting on all individual land use changes that concern the direct interests of their campaign donors.

2. Ensure that elected officials should also recuse themselves on such votes including zoning and other individual land use changes, when the spouses and immediate family members of those with direct interests in development and real estate donated to the elected official's campaign.



Background:

In the Province of British Columbia, elected officials in local governments, have received thousands of dollars of campaign contributions from developers, developers' relatives and their work colleagues.

One of the key functions of local government in British Columbia is dealing with applications from developers regarding zoning/rezoning.  Favourable zoning decisions by elected officials, can lead to developers, their companies and financiers, making millions of dollars, regardless of the impact on communities and the environments in them.

The dangers of undue influence on the decisions of local government officials comes into perhaps its clearest focus in regard to political campaign donations, which are often crucial for candidates to achieve political office.  If a local government becomes 'stacked' with elected officials who have received campaign donations from the same developers, the danger of state and regulatory capture can become acute and democracy itself can become undermined.

A notion that has been bandied about by the government and its judicial system, that campaign donations from developers to local government officials may not indicate a direct pecuniary (financial) interest to the elected official is ludicrous and doesn't stand up to an ounce of logic-based scrutiny.

If elected officials were not paid salaries and other benefits by the government, then that would be true that there is no direct pecuniary interest for them in being elected. 

However, as elected officials are paid salaries, they have a direct pecuniary interest in being first elected, and then potentially re-elected.  That the difference between being elected and not elected can often hinge on campaign donations is clear. If it wasn't, candidates wouldn't be so eager to gain campaign donations. 

There is thus, a direct pecuniary interest involved for those seeking, or achieving election in the form of the salary that comes with the office.

To pretend otherwise, is absurd.

It's time for the Provincial Government of British Columbia to stop turning a blind eye to this issue.  Doing so, for many is only seen as an act of complicity in allowing it to continue.

For many, the continued allowance of elected officials in local government in British Columbia to not recuse themselves on votes on zoning that concerns developer campaign donors, is evidence (on an ethical level) of systemic political corruption across the province and should thus be ended immediately by the Provincial Government of British Columbia through rendering the practice illegal.

 


Resources:

Elections BC's Searchable
Financial Reports and Political Contributions System (FRPC)

Recusal - Wikipedia

Money still skewing local elections - Commentary - Focus on Victoria

Colwood council working to clean up voter perception on campaign donations | Spare News | pentictonherald.ca

Conflicts of interest in development votes (Letter in the Times Colonist by Kirk Buhne)

Transparency International Knowledge Hub | Knowledge Hub (Introduction to undue influence on decision-making)

State capture - Wikipedia

State capture | Definition, Causes & Effects | Britannica

Corporatism | Definition, History & Examples | Britannica

Regulatory capture - Wikipedia

Clientelism - Wikipedia

Elite capture - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinecure

Advocacy group - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence_peddling

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption

Cartel - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest





For more information, please contact BCPetition@mail.com