Three years or four

 

Sharon McLeay

Times Contributor

 

Alberta changed its municipal government terms from three years to four on December 5, 2012, amending the Local Authorities Election Act.

Input from serving municipal officials supported the move.

 “The Alberta Urban Municipalities Association and Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties have called for  increased governing terms of four years,” said Cam Traynor, spokesperson for the Alberta Municipal Government in discussions on electoral changes.

The move to a four year term has been discussed in municipalities across all provinces in Canada. Prior to the implementation of changes to the Electoral Act for Alberta, Municipal Affairs Minister Doug Griffiths commented in the news that an extended year would bring cost savings to the election process, by decreasing the amount of elections held over the long term. He said that the three year term didn’t give new councillors time to master the learning curve, and many municipal councillors agreed with him, indicating four years allows sitting councils a longer period to get business done. 

Dissenters point out that the number of years has no bearing on productivity. A paper by J. Stephen Ferris of Carleton University, done in 2013, shows the number of bills passed by the federal government sitting for four year terms actually decreased over time, so the extra year had no net benefit. 

In 2008, Allan Drazen and Marcela Eslava produced a paper that indicated votes can be manipulated through voter-friendly spending. A longer term may allow the ruling political candidate additional time to sway voter attitudes. Most global analysts indicate the practise works better with a poor population. Social engineering, however, is a common practise employed in developed countries, by delivering social programs to voters in the year leading up to an election. Social media, advanced polling and media coverage also impact voter decisions to some extent. The longer term will decrease the number of times those perks are delivered to the public. There have been cases in the political arena in which the social engineering backfires, biting politicians with a negative impact. If those in power are just plain bad at governance and alienate people by not recognising the current issues and opinions, voters are not swayed and often surprise the pollsters. 

Another drawback to four year terms, according to voter advocacy groups, is it delays voters’ ability to change governing officials. Social media postings to a CBC article about municipal election term change showed readers were split for and against the longer term.

The City of Calgary website indicated a longer term would allow businesses and residents more pre-planning stability reflected in four years of planned tax revenues. Whether acquiring an extra electoral year would definitely cause those taxes to remain fixed was not qualified. If the trend of yearly salary increases for elected officials is maintained and the cost of services continues to rise incrementally, voters already know that nothing is sure except death and increased taxation, and an extra year only prolongs the prognosis.

For the anarchist or apathetic voter, not voting is the option of choice. It is interesting that until 2012, over 50 per cent of eligible voters in Alberta didn’t vote, so for that portion of the populace, whether the term is three or four years really doesn’t matter to them.