New Democratic Party leadership hopeful Harry Lali sees an idea "whose time has come" and figures he's just the guy to make something out of it.
He means public regulation of political party leadership campaigns and nomination contests as a way to rein in controversies over mass signings, dubious memberships and other abuses.
Lali believes most politicians are dancing around the issue. He figures it is because those practices are often associated with the South Asian community and, as Lali notes, "they fear it might be seen as racist."
As a member of the community himself, he's less open to accusations of "playing the race card." Plus, as a self-mocking "brown guy" who took up the cause of "old white guys" against his own party's quota system for selecting candidates, he's not inclined to political correctness.
He's surely right about this being an idea whose time has come. His own party kicked off the current round of controversy with allegations of bulk delivery of memberships from the South Asian community, raised by Lali himself.
That incident was only the latest in a long list. In the 2000 NDP leadership campaign, more than 1,000 South Asians were found to have been drafted into the party ranks without their knowledge, and more than 100 had to be dumped from the NDP list because they were already members of the BC Liberals.
The Liberals, now in the midst of their first leadership campaign in almost 20 years, are as at least as deeply engaged in recruiting South Asians as the New Democrats.
Indeed, six leadership campaigns -Kevin Falcon, Mike de Jong and Christy Clark among the Liberals; Adrian Dix, Mike Farnworth and Lali himself in the NDP - have been trolling the South Asian community for memberships.
Moreover, the abuses are not confined to any one region or group; witness recent embarrassments involving a Liberal cat, some unsuspecting Liberal hockey players and the selfproclaimed Liberal "residents" of a Kelowna restaurant.
But all those shenanigans merely serve to strengthen Lali's case for public oversight "to prevent mass membership sign-ups and to avoid manipulation of immigrant communities by all political parties."
His remedy is to involve Elections BC. The independent watchdog already has a role in overseeing financial contributions to party leadership campaigns. Lali would extend that authority to leadership contests and to the selection of party nominees in the 85 individual provincial constituencies.
"All party leadership nomination contests will be run by Elections BC under a clear set of rules and guidelines in order to ensure fairness and accountability for all leadership candidates and to avoid any actual or perceived conflicts-of-interest and to avoid any actual or perceived favouritism," he wrote in a 10-point policy released last month.
Likewise, "all constituency nominations for MLA candidate meetings, constituency convention delegate selection meetings, and constituency election of executive/officers meetings will take place under the referee of a representative of Elections BC."
The most controversial proposal would see Elections BC take custody of the party membership lists, albeit on a strictly confidential basis.
"All political parties must supply, under strict confidentiality and privacy rules, a list of names and residential addresses of all existing members of their respective political parties to Elections BC who will run the names through a verification process to determine if any members carry dual or multiple memberships in B.C. political parties."
Double entries to be cancelled forthwith. Parties to be required to update lists on a monthly basis. British Columbians free to bypass the party apparatus and directly register themselves with Elections BC as supporters of a political party.
This, as Lali notes, is a common practice south of the border: "Voters self-register themselves as 'Democrats', 'Republicans', 'Independents', before voting in primaries."
Others voicing sympathy for the idea of involving Elections BC include Lali's fellow leadership candidate, Mike Farnworth, and BC Liberal cabinet minister Kevin Krueger.
Others in the major parties would likely resist outside encroachment on the selection rules. Nor would the parties likely embrace loss of control over their membership lists, a key tool for party fundraising and outreach.
Apart from self-serving objections, there are some valid concerns about the proposal. Should taxpayers be on the hook for the cost of a publicly funded office scrutinizing party activity? Would people hold back from joining a political party if they thought the membership list could be made public?
Lali's proposal needs tweaking, but has considerable merit.
Political parties are important public institutions. They choose our leaders and the folks who become MLAs and cabinet ministers. With leadership contests in a governing party - Social Credit in 1986, the NDP in 1996 and 2000, the B.C. Liberals today - party members pick a premier with zero input from the public at large.
Independent scrutiny from Elections BC would help ensure that those selections are fair, open and free from abuse.
