https://vancouverpublicspace.ca/2010/04/15/advocating-against-the-corporate-vote/ Mon, 28 Aug 2017 20:00:29 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 https://vancouverpublicspace.ca/2010/04/15/advocating-against-the-corporate-vote/#comment-32 Wed, 09 Jun 2010 03:58:59 +0000 http://vancouverpublicspace.wordpress.com/?p=206#comment-32 […] submission to the Task Force argued against the re-introduction of the corporate vote and we are very […]

]]> https://vancouverpublicspace.ca/2010/04/15/advocating-against-the-corporate-vote/#comment-31 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:55:23 +0000 http://vancouverpublicspace.wordpress.com/?p=206#comment-31 Brian might find it easier to comprehend Item 1 by reading Government Voting Task Force Corporate Vote Discussion Paper, p. 7 which, among other things states “effectiveness of the vote on addressing business concerns were arguably minimal.”

]]> https://vancouverpublicspace.ca/2010/04/15/advocating-against-the-corporate-vote/#comment-30 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 08:13:14 +0000 http://vancouverpublicspace.wordpress.com/?p=206#comment-30 […] April 15, 2010 – Advocating against the corporate vote Earlier today the Vancouver Public Space Network sent off a submission to the Local Government Elections Taskforce. In October of last year, the Taskforce was charged with the reviewing issues relating to local government elections and has been gathering input with a view to recommending legislative changes “to improve the electoral process for local government elections across B.C.” (More…) April 6, 2010 – Vancouver Day: the city turns 124 Today, April 6, marks the 124th anniversary of our home city’s incorporation.  It’s not a date that features prominently on too many wall calendars, granted, but perhaps it ought to.  After all, there’s so much to celebrate about this city and its inhabitants. (More…) […]

]]> https://vancouverpublicspace.ca/2010/04/15/advocating-against-the-corporate-vote/#comment-29 Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:29:28 +0000 http://vancouverpublicspace.wordpress.com/?p=206#comment-29 1. You said; “It is our experience, however, that the right to vote has an impact on who is elected but has no obvious influence on how those elected will govern.” This does not make sense. If businesses in a municipality have the ability to get one business minded individual elected to their local government, that person will be their voice to represent their views – that’s all we ask.
2. Effectiveness: The process CFIB has recommended would make the system fair, effective and eliminate potential for abuse. In 1990 businesses paid 1.8 times more than residents on same value property, then the vote was removed in 1993 and businesses now pay almost three times more than residents. This shows that indeed there has been some evidence that The corporate vote appears to directly impact tax rates on business.
3. Some argue that restoring the municipal business vote would allow businesses to take over municipal elections and negate the influence that residents have over municipal affairs. There are 2,993,420 eligible voters in BC. BC’s current population is 4.5 million people. The 390,000 businesses in BC represent just one potential business vote for every 7.7 citizens. In fact, a strong argument could be made the business vote will not go nearly far enough to create accountability to businesses.
4. It is interesting to note that the Local Government Act allows residential property owners to vote as non-resident electors, in multiple municipalities, wherever they own a residential property even if they are not residents of the municipality. The right to vote as a non-resident elector recognizes the inherent right to representation relative to the taxes a property owner pays in each municipality. It points to a fundamental connection between taxation and representation. It is this fundamental right to have a vote in relation to property taxation that BC’s businesses are seeking through restoration of the business vote; a right that non-resident residential property owners already enjoy. The non-residential elector who owns five residential properties, in five different municipalities, gets to vote five times in relation to the taxes they pay in each. How is this fair in relation to business owners in these communities that do not even get one vote to represent their business taxes?
5. As a business cannot literally vote, a proxy must be designated. This means that in some cases, one person may vote twice in a municipal election. For example, a business owner who operates a business in Richmond and lives in Richmond could vote twice in the Richmond election, once As the proxy vote for the business and once as a resident. However, the business is really the “person” with the voting rights in this case. The business gets the right to vote as it is taxed. Thus, the principle of no taxation without representation is respected. There is much precedent for proxy voting. Many people currently cast two ballots in local government elections in BC. Blind people, those that cannot speak English well and those that can’t read all currently have the ability to designate proxies who may reside in the same municipality. Many proxy voters then vote twice in the same election. It is also worth noting that BC law recognises a business as a person with all of the responsibilities of a person. Governments require businesses to abide by the same laws and regulations as a person and subject to the same liabilities. Shouldn’t some of the rights attached to the responsibilities of personhood also apply to businesses, especially in light of the onerous tax burden they are being forced to endure?
6. The business vote will likely result in a much greater involvement and interest in local government elections from business owners, their staff and families.

]]>