Should political parties get inside information on whether you voted or not? – Part 1

By Peter Ewart

The provincial government has put forward a Bill requiring Elections BC to hand over voter participation information to political parties as to whether or not a voter casts a ballot in a provincial election (see previous article) (1). This Bill originally came about as a result of pressure last Fall from 4 political parties – the Liberals, NDP, Greens and Conservatives. But in the last few days deep cracks have formed in the support for this Bill.

As things stand under the old legislation, scrutineers from political parties have been allowed access to polling stations on election day in order to record which citizens have cast a ballot. The aim has been to allow the party election machine time to re-visit or phone supporters who have not yet voted that day, and thus, the logic goes, increase voter turnout.

But, under the old legislation, Elections BC only allowed access to this information when voting was going on – not after the election. For the political parties, this has posed difficulties. For example, it has been increasingly difficult for these parties to find volunteers to be scrutineers at every polling station. In addition, the information parties gather on voting day as to precisely who has voted is often not exact or is incomplete.

So the idea behind this new legislation is for Elections BC, which is a non-partisan body, to essentially take on the job formerly done by the parties, compile the list of all those who voted or did not vote, and hand them over to the parties after the election.

However, recently the Privacy Commissioner of BC (2), along with several MLAs, IntegrityBC, media pundits and others, have come out swinging against this legislation, arguing that it violates the privacy of voters in the province.

According to Independent MLA Vicki Huntington, this is an “incredibly self-interested piece of legislation”; and she goes on to say that “privacy concerns [of voters] are being brushed aside for the sake of making political campaigning easier for the parties” (3). She further points out that the new legislation discriminates against independent candidates as only registered political parties will be allowed access to the voter-turnout information.

Andrew Weaver, MLA for the Green Party, argues that “it’s nobody’s business who has or has not voted” (4). Both he and Huntington believe that even the present arrangement, whereby parties and candidates do have access to voter-turnout information on election day, is deeply flawed. In their opinion, no access at all should be allowed to this information before, during or after an election.

In terms of the problem of low voter turnout and lack of volunteers for the political parties, Weaver says that the solution is to give voters “something to vote for” and participation will increase.

According to press reports (5), even the Liberals and NDP are feeling the heat over this issue and are acknowledging that there could be a problem. Laura Miller, executive director of the BC Liberal Party, says that she “appreciates the privacy commissioner raising flags,” and believes that, if the legislation passes, the privacy commissioner should be consulted on the rules (6).

NDP House Leader Mike Farnworth also acknowledges that there is “validity and legitimacy to some of the issues” that the privacy commissioner has raised, and that an amendment may be needed “to tighten the language” as to how this voter-turnout information will be used (5).

Nonetheless, at least as things stand now, both the Liberals and NDP will be supporting the main thrust of the legislation, i.e. that political parties, after the election, will be handed over the complete list of all citizens who voted or did not vote, along with their addresses.

What problems or even dangers could this pose to the privacy rights of British Columbians? Stay tuned for Part 2 in this series of articles.

Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca  

• Ewart, Peter. “New voting Act violates privacy of citizens.” 250 News. April 21, 2015.

• Denham, Elizabeth. Letter. “Bill 20 – Election Amendment Act; OIPC File F15-60984.” Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner. April 13, 2015.

• Huntington, Vicki. “Huntington opposes plan for increased access to voter information.” www.vickihuntington.ca. April, 22, 2015.

• Weaver, Andrew. Global News. April 23, 2015.

• Leyne, Les. “Objections grow to providing vote data.” Vancouver Courier. April 23, 2015.

• Palmer, Vaughn. “Political ground shifts on voter list legislation.” Vancouver Sun. April 25, 2015.