Sunday, November 8, 1998 — North Shore News — 3 north shore news SUNDAY FOCUS Co the pe Andrew McCredie Editor andrew@nsnews.com WHAT is direct democracy? The latest awkward name for the latest awkward political party? A new cable channel televising the House of Parliament? A new vote-by-mail scheme? For a growing number of Canadians, direct democracy represents a much-needed evolutionary — some say revolutionary — step for our political system. Its advocates contend direct democracy is an opportunity for cit- izens to truly participate in the democratic process by voting on major issues of the day. They also believe it would correct a major flaw in our democratic system: the issucs we elect someone on are sometimes quite different from the issues that clected representative will face while in government. Direct democracy goes by many names and forms. Those cheaply made Washington State televi- sion commercials begging for your “NO ON 64° vate come election day? Direct democracy in action. That 51%-49% Quebee vote a few years back? Direct democracy in action. Last Tuesday’s elections in the United States fearured a record 239 state ballot initiatives, includ- ing casino gambling, banning biliboards, allowing, seriously ill people to smoke marijuana, and pro- tecting wolves from being snared. In Washington State citizens voted to ban affirmative action race and gender preferences in university admissions and government contracting and hiring. Call it proposition, call it referenda, call it a ballot initiative, whatever you call it, the basic concept of direct democracy is simple. All that’s necded is a few people, a big issue they all agree on, and dogged determination. If they can get a pre-determined number of signatures on a petition, the issue becomes part of an election tick- ct. North Vancouver is home to one to the strongest, and arguably most powerful, direct democracy propo- nents in the country: North Vancouver MP Ted White. Direct democracy’s White knight White sees it all the time. Voter apathy. People call him with their concerns — sometimes solutions — and he tells them to write so-and-so minister. “They inevitably say they couldn’r be bothered, that one letter won’e do a thing,” tlic MP says. “They say they doubt the minister would even actually read it.” While his West Vancouver counterpart, John Reynolds, climbs party ranks — he currently holds the high profile immigration critic position — White found himself’ passionately involved in the concept of direct democracy. As Reform’s democratic reform critic, White made referendum and recall legislation his passion. That passion has produced two bills. “Te took me two-and-a-half years of research to put this together; it’s really my reason for being here (in Ottawa),” White says, holding Bill C-229 and Bill C-371 in his hands. “If [ allow chis bill to be debated in the House, there will be three speakers, 20 minutes each, and that’s ir. Gune. Two-and-a-half years of work down the tubes. There's nothing democratic at all, or representative at all, about what happens in thar place (the louse ). White’s home country, New Zealand, introduced the Citizens Initiated Referendum Law in 1993, and the MP says it’s high time Canada passed similar legislation. But he’s not holding his breath. “The politicians are usually afraid of this type of legislation because they're scared that the extremes of soci- ety will get control of an issue,” he says. In practice however, thar is not borne out. White cites a 1994 New Zealand case where a group calling itself The Friends of Democracy launched petitions calling for free health care and free education. “I talked with the speaker of the house in New Zealand and he was terrified these peo- ple would get the signatures,” White said. “In a year the group was incapable of getting half the signatures required because the average person knew that these things weren't free.” In other words, politicians underestimate the sense and knowledge of the average . Voter. “The small town of Rossland, B.C. has had direct democracy for years and contrary to the predictions of naysayers, the people there have voted themselves tax increases on at least three occasions,” White says. “Once to improve the water supply; once to pave the main street; and once for a better sewage system.” Not so special interests What is so intriguing about direct democracy, White says, is how it affects special interest groups. The grassroots origins of special interest groups often make them seem homey and harmless, but in fact these vocal and well-organized groups set a great part of the political agenda. Taking the above concept of direct democracy to heart, one would expect ese media-sawvy militaries to set even more of the agenda. It’s only signatures they need, right? Right, but you’d be surprised how few special interest groups have their say under direct democracy. As White has experienced first hand, vocal, in-your-face groups are all bark and no bite. Especially when it comes to representing a majority of voters. His best example of this came from a confrontation with a group over a proposed Women's National Monument at Capilano College. The group was outraged when White questioned why federal funds should be used on this project. See Special page 21 Movers talking about an evolution THE following prepared com- ments are in response to the ques- tion: What are your thoughts ona direct democracy approach to deciding the big issues of the day? Den Bell, NV District Mayor “An important aspect in any consideration of direet democra- cy is the potential for added cost and delays compared with the existing elected council role and responsibility, and council’s poli- cy of extensive public involve- meant in Jocal government deci- sions. Proponents of direct democracy seem to be focused more on a lack of meaningful public input in decision-making at the federal and provincial gov- ermment levels rather than with council.” Patricia Bona:ne, WV Mayor “[have been through two ref erenda in my 12 years on West Vancouver council and under- stand the difficulty in providing the best background information possible for the clectorate. However, on matters of major importance a referendum couid be worth the time and effort bur should be used sparingly.” Gordon Campbell, B.C. Liberal leader “B.C. Liberals strongly sup- port direct democracy. British Columbians want and deserve a greater say in the critical issues thar their clected representatives deal with, Thar is why B.C. Liberals support more free votes in the Legislature, greater use of referenda, workebdle recall legisla- tion, fixed election dates and a set legislative calender.” Jeremy Dalton, West Van- Capilano MLA “Who determines what are the ‘big’ issues of the day? ‘The press? The elected representative? A political party? This is very open-ended. An elected official cannot seek constituent opinion on many issues, big or otherwise. I believe the best one can do, except in cases where time allows, is take the temperature through calls and = strect-corner discussion. When legislation hits the flocr of the House there is seldom time to do otheraise.” Daniel Jarvis, North Van- Seymour MLA { support frec-voting legisla- tures and referenda on larger issues. Ie is unfortunate that seri- ous issues cannot go to referenda due to time constraints, bur with modern technology constituents can access their representatives directly, I have used free vote privilege when constituents have made their opinions known to me. Jack Loucks, North Van City Mayor “I believe thar the direct democracy approach to deciding the big, issues of the day should be used very sparingly and only with those issues where govern- ment considers it to be the most appropriate and best system for society to use to make a decision for them.” See Politicians page 21