Second Reading

Bill 21, Election Amendment Act, 2011

November 23, 2011

Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me guess. We’re going to talk about broken promises again. Oh, my gosh. It seems like every bill that we have talked about is a broken promise. Some sort of a pattern is developing here.

With the introduction of Bill 21, Mr. Speaker, the Election Amendment Act, 2011, this Premier is building a brick-by-brick legacy of broken promises. It is getting very, very difficult to believe anything that is coming out of this Premier’s mouth when it comes to promises. These broken promises now include what we’re talking about here tonight. In addition to that, this is the same Premier who promised more democracy and transparency. She then proceeded, as her first order of business after being elected, to cancel the fall sitting of the Legislature, then bring it back for two days, followed by a month-long vacation, followed by jamming in six controversial – somewhat controversial, some of them – and substantive bills into essentially four days of full debate. If that’s more transparency and democracy, bring back the previous Premier because he was a lot more democratic than that, and that’s saying something.

Ms Blakeman: I never thought you’d be saying that.

Mr. Anderson: Yeah, I never thought I would be saying that.

The other broken promises by this Premier, obviously, include her vow on national television to repeal section 3 of the Human Rights Act to protect free speech. As a human rights lawyer who spent three years as Justice minister, you’d think this promise was a pretty solid one. Then as Premier she only tells her Justice minister to assess the appropriateness of section 3, whether to amend or repeal it in the human rights legislation. Again, had she not thought it through before she made the promise? Who knows what will happen now? Who knows? She made a promise. Whether she keeps it or not, I guess – who knows if we’ll ever know if she keeps it or not?

Obviously, the public health inquiry: we’ve talked a lot about that. She promised a full judicial public inquiry to be conducted before the next election. She promised it during the election. It was the cornerstone of her election promises, and then she changed her mind. She made the judicial part optional to the Health Quality Council, so it’s an optional judicial inquiry, and she made it literally impossible for it to be held before the next election.

As I said in my comments earlier, Mr. Speaker, I highly doubt that we would have the current Premier that we have – I think that we would have as Premier Gary Mar – if she hadn’t made those promises. She made those promises. It probably made a 1,600-vote difference in the election campaign that she was a part of with the PC Party, and she won based on those promises that either she had no intention of keeping, or she just made them up on the fly and didn’t really think through the ramifications of them.

Her opponents, the Deputy Premier and Gary Mar and the Energy minister and so forth, tried to make promises that they generally knew they would be able to keep. I would hope that those are the promises that they made. I’m assuming the promises they made fit that criteria. Because of that, they didn’t get as many votes because they kept things in perspective as to what they could do, set reasonable limits to what they could do. Maybe that’s the reason.

The point is that this Premier has no credibility. She made promises she couldn’t keep or that she had no intention of keeping. Because of that, she has completely lost her credibility, I think, as someone whose word can be trusted when it comes to promises that she makes during elections. Albertans are nobody’s fools. There’s the old saying: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Albertans are not fools. They will not be fooled again. [interjection] You should know. Your guy lost because of these broken promises. Good grief, hon. member.

Out of this long list of broken promises the easiest one to keep, and frankly the stupidest one to break because it is so easy to keep, is this promise of a fixed election date. You can’t be clearer than what she said. She said that during her leadership we will have a fixed election date. Instead, she gets into power, and what does she do? I mean, this is unprecedented in North America that she does this. I did almost fall off my chair when the House leader . . .

An Hon. Member: What was your quote to him then?

Mr. Anderson: I just said: you’ve got to be kidding me. Honestly? You’re honestly going to try to sell to Albertans, after making such a direct promise, that a fixed-election season is appropriate?

Let’s review why other jurisdictions have fixed election dates and we still won’t. The intention of fixed election dates, one of them anyway, is that it takes away the advantage of the sitting government over opposition parties in calling an election when-ever it is most politically advantageous to them. Fixed election dates are nonpartisan in nature and place all parties on an equal playing field. They are designed to strengthen democracy, transparency, and accountability within the electoral system that we have. It allows Elections Alberta to get better prepared. It allows candidate recruitment to go better because good candidates – and, obviously, there are some good candidates that still get nominated. Who knows what kind of rock stars and fantastic genius legislative Einsteins we could have here if they actually could put a date on an election and work backwards from that so that people with real jobs, you know, could actually plan their lives in a way that they could run for office rather than kind of could actually plan their lives in a way that they could run for office rather than kind of trying to maybe hope that they time it right for the election?

It’s not like this is a new concept. We’re not pushing the risky bounds here by taking a step into the dark with the fixed election dates. Eight other jurisdictions in Canada have already established fixed election dates for this very reason. Our neighbours to the west in British Columbia brought this in a decade ago, and their fixed date is the second Tuesday in May. Whoa. Hold the phone. That is pretty specific. What if there’s rain? What if it’s a tough spring in B.C.? They’ve never had any kind of flooding or storms.

Ms Notley: Never had that.

Mr. Anderson: Never had that, yet so specific.

Our neighbours to the east in Saskatchewan, the only truly conservative government in western Canada, just held their first election date, established by Premier Brad Wall, which is held on the first Monday in November. Couldn’t be very cold in November in Saskatchewan, could it?

Ms Notley: It’s very predictable.

Mr. Anderson: Very predictable weather in Saskatchewan.

Similar legislation exists in Manitoba. No problem in Manitoba. They never have floods or anything like that. Ontario, New Brunswick, P.E.I., Newfoundland – Newfoundland, a very stable climate – and the Northwest Territories, an extremely stable cli-mate. In all these provinces a fixed election date singles out a specific day of the year.

Instead of committing to a common-sense legislative promise that almost every other jurisdiction in this country has recognized as good for democracy, this Premier has instead been playing fast and loose with the truth on this file since the recent leadership race for the PC Party began. On September 23 she promised PC members that she would commit to calling an election in March 2012 and every four years from that date.

You know, I remember the previous Premier. It’s funny. Be careful what you wish for. The previous Premier, actually, was reasonably consistent on this. He would always say: “Look. Four years since the last one would be March 2012. Look for it at that time.” You know, it’s funny. I know in the Wildrose caucus we actually took him at his word. I’m quite sure that if he was still the Premier, I think he would have called it then. I think he would have. He didn’t seem to have a problem with following through with what he said he was going to do regardless of whether it was good or bad, so we kind of believed him on that.

Not this Premier. Not this Premier at all. She was more specific. She specifically said: “I will set a date. I will set a fixed election date.” Then she wavered. She waffled. Now we’ve got this three-month window, so be careful what you wish for. It again shows that the previous Premier was far more democratic than this current Premier, which is ridiculous because that’s how she was elected, on a platform of transparency and accountability and respect for democracy. So much for that.

She even specified that Albertans are supportive of the idea and made reference to the fact that many other provinces currently use the model. What model was she referring to? Is there some model that I’m not aware of in Canada that has seasonal election dates?

Mr. Chase: It’s a made-in-Alberta model.

Mr. Anderson: Yeah, a made-in-Alberta model is indeed the case.

She went on to say that fixed election dates are important because Albertans, quote, don’t believe any political party should have even a theoretical upper hand in managing the political agenda and then picking the election date accordingly. That is beautiful, that Albertans don’t believe any political party should have even a theoretical upper hand in managing the political agenda and then picking the election date accordingly. Those are fantastic words, and they’re true. She was dead on. The only problem is that she apparently forgot them the moment she said them because she flipped as soon as she was elected. That’s what’s so gross about this whole thing. I mean, it’s gross.

You get elected on democracy and transparency. You say that you’re going to do something right before an election. You’ve got other qualified candidates out there campaigning who are trying, I’m assuming, to tell the truth in what they’re going to do. You win by 1,600 votes, which is nothing, obviously, in a province-wide race of any kind, and then you proceed to break the promises you were just elected on, including this one. Just preposterous. She has even been quoted as saying that the status quo of no election dates needs to be changed so as to deny the government “the behind-the-scenes deal-making and manipulation that some-times characterize the timing of an election.”

But these bold promises of a strengthened democracy were broken mere days following her election as Premier as she began to openly muse when an election could be held in the future. An example of this was on October 5 in an online chat with the Calgary Herald editorial board, when saying that an election date could be – this is October 5, three days after she was elected, after she had said all those things I just talked about – after a spring sitting or maybe after a throne speech or maybe in June as, quote, sometimes the Legislature takes on a life of its own, so a date is a little unpredictable, unquote. You never know what those Legislatures might do. What happens at the Legislature stays at the Legislature.

This is crazy. This is just too unpredictable, you know.

We’ve got to make sure we have some flexibility. Pretty soon, you know, the members of the Liberal Party are rioting, you know, and the Wildrose is holding keggers in the government’s room over there. I mean, who knows? Who knows what could happen? We’ve got to keep the flexibility.

Instead of taking a common-sense approach and mimicking successful legislation that all parties of all partisan stripes have accepted across this country, this Premier’s government instead has decided to insist that they remain in control with regard to when they call an election.

This floating election season: we’ve got to have a name contest for this because there have been lots of different names. I like floating election season.

Mr. Chase: How about a U-pick election?

Mr. Anderson: A U-pick election. That’s right. We should vote. What we should do is have Albertans vote on when they want to have their real election.

Mr. Chase: Yeah. We can have a selection election.

Mr. Anderson: A selection election. That’s right.

The floating election season still gives the government the freedom to call the election on a date that gives them the best political advantage. The government still gets to shoot the gun to start the race when everyone else is guessing exactly when the election will start. This gives them time to buy ads, train their candidates, and organize their volunteers before opposition parties can be ready. People don’t understand this.

Here’s one example. When you buy ads, you have to do that in advance, obviously, if you want the best ad spots. Well, if you’re the government, clearly, you can make sure that you get all the best spots because you’re going to be the one that knows the exact date of the election, when it’s going to start, what order, all that sort of thing. It’s a huge advantage over the rest of the opposition parties, who kind of get the leftovers. That’s just one example, but there are some nuts-and-bolts things that literally give the home team that kind of 1-nothing lead before the puck is dropped.

Mr. Chase: It’s mostly nuts.

Mr. Anderson: Mostly nuts. That’s right.

This is a shameful piece of legislation that sends the message to Albertans that they come second in the Premier’s pursuit of power and the attempts to hold on to it. What other explanation is there for a

Premier and a government to break such a simple, straight-forward, clear promise? You certainly won’t find one in any of these . . . [Mr. Anderson’s speaking time expired]

The Deputy Speaker: Standing Order 29(2)(a) allows for five minutes of comments or questions. The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity.

Mr. Chase: Yes. It was with deep regret that I heard the bell sound. I was inspired by the hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere, and I was very anxious to hear the rest of his summation.

The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere.

Mr. Anderson: All right. Thank you very much. I’ll speed it up.

I want to go back to what the Government House Leader, who is here tonight, came out last week and told the public, that the PCs, the government, wanted the flexibility to form an election window. One of the reasons he gave was that there may be natural disasters to hit the province.

Despite this concern never being seriously raised in any other jurisdiction in the western world – in the western world this has not been a concern when it comes to fixed election dates. This government’s bad spin is especially quite lame considering the fact that Albertans know that any threat of natural disasters in this province, whether it be forest fires or floods, doesn’t really occur until May. May is the month where they’d have to hold it if they didn’t like the polls in March or April, so there is a little inconsistency there.

Even more unbelievable were the claims by the Justice minister – and I like the Justice minister – stating that a fixed election date might fall on a day of cultural or religious significance. Well, let’s take a look at that excuse. Though it is important to honour and respect individuals from all religious backgrounds and traditions, it is not necessary to create a three-month election window to maintain government control over the timing of an election to avoid any cultural or religious sensitivities. You can pick a date, as all these other jurisdictions do, that allows you to make sure that that date doesn’t fall on a very special holiday for other people.

If this was truly their concern, this Premier and her government might have wanted to take a closer look at the legislation for fixed election dates in Ontario, where the government must call an election every four years that lands on the first Thursday in October. She may have even had the chance to directly talk to the Ontario Premier during her visit to Toronto about how to best get around this sticky issue. The law in Ontario allows for a date to be moved forward to any of the following seven days in the case of the odd instance where a religious or culturally significant holiday is in conflict with the fixed election date. It’s a simple solution for what this government seems to think is a pretty complex issue.

The Election Act already states that if 28 days after the writ is dropped is a holiday, the election would be the following day. Imagine that, the following day. Holy smokes. If this type of clear and precise amendment to the legislation seems too constrictive to the government, there are other creative ways to get around these alleged problems with a fixed election date.

Surely this government has enough brain power, enough coals burning, to muster the creativity to get around these distressing loopholes that get in the way of more open, transparent, and effective democracy for all Albertans. Otherwise, this legislation will stand in the minds of Albertans as one of the most bizarre broken promises committed by any head of government in this province’s long, long history. It’s shameful. It’s hypocritical legislation. As the Wildrose we will be voting against it and hope that the government, when they come, will at some point in the future change the legislation to reflect what Albertans want, which is fixed election dates. If they won’t, I know a few parties, specifically the one I’m with, that will.

Dim lights