By Carlito Pablo
Former B.C. premier Bill Vander Zalm has set in motion the process for an initiative against the harmonized sales tax.
In a phone interview, Vander Zalm said that he has filed an application for an initiative with Elections B.C., and that he and other opponents of the new tax are looking at April 1 as the possible start date for collecting signatures on their petition.
“We don’t want to actually go around Fort Nelson, Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Prince George, all of those places in the middle of winter,” Vander Zalm told the Straight lightheartedly.
“Once we get 10 percent of the registered voters in each constituency to sign the initiative petition, then it goes to the government—it goes back to Elections B.C., which then presents it to the government,” the former premier explained.
“The government has two options. They can adopt the bill, the proposed legislation that goes with the petition, which basically cancels the HST, or they can choose to go to referendum and have the people vote on whether they want the HST or don’t want the HST. They must do one or the other,” Vander Zalm added.
Elections B.C. spokesperson Don Main told the Straight that his body received Vander Zalm’s application on December 24.
Here’s how the Elections B.C. Web site explains how the initiative process works:
The Recall and Initiative Act is administered by the Chief Electoral Officer. The Act allows registered voters in British Columbia to propose new laws or changes to existing laws.
Any registered voter can apply to have a petition issued to gather support for a legislative proposal by submitting an application to the Chief Electoral Officer. A completed application consists of a fully completed and signed application form, a copy of the draft Bill, and a non-refundable $50 processing fee. The draft Bill must be on a matter within the jurisdiction of the provincial legislature and must be written in a clear and unambiguous manner. Approval in principle of an application is officially granted at the time a Notice of Petition is published in the British Columbia Gazette.
Sixty days after the notice is published in the Gazette, the Chief Electoral Officer issues an original petition signature sheet and cover sheet for each electoral district. An initiative petition must be signed within 90 days from the date on which it is issued. Signatures may be gathered by volunteer canvassers.
If more than 10% of the registered voters in each of the electoral districts of the province, who were registered to vote on the date the petition was issued, sign an initiative petition within the 90-day canvassing period, and the proponent complies with the initiative financing provisions, the Chief Electoral Officer must send a copy of the verified petition and draft Bill to the Select Standing Committee on Legislative Initiatives.
The Select Standing Committee must meet within 30 days of receipt of the petition and draft Bill. From their first meeting, the Committee has 90 days to consider the legislative proposal and either table a report recommending introduction of the draft Bill, or refer the initiative to the Chief Electoral Officer for an initiative vote.
For an initiative to be successful, the majority of registered voters in the province must vote in favour of the initiative and more than 50% of registered voters in at least two-thirds of the electoral districts in the province must vote in favour of the initiative. If successful, government must introduce the initiative Bill at the earliest practical opportunity.
[Straight.com]
- Bookmark :
- Digg
- del.icio.us
- Stumbleupon
- Redit it
I would be willing to canvas in my community.
That is great Shannon. Make sure you visit fighthst.com and register as a volunteer. We need everyone to pitch in to help collect enough signatures! Thank you!
Greetings All
Can we afford HST after the Games?
To those following the 2010 Games news may know that the skiing may be done on straw and ice transported from some distance as the local stuff may be all but washed away by the starting date. Some may have also seen the item that makes it plainer to recognize that the V in the VPD may mean the VANOC PD, as the department is rumored to be moving to its masters quarters. All such bits of view as to what is going on in camera, and who actually runs BC, IOC, VANOC, or the Gordo, all add to our worries. As in, guess who is paying for all this extra expense?
Well there is some past good news. The IOC made a press spread announcement some weeks back that they would cover all cost over runs. I heard it on CBC radio so it must have been said on record. But in the confusion of all the new plagues coming before the start, we the taxpayers may have to lift the bill before any one recalls the IOC gesture. We can truly help all to remember.
If a group of citizens get together they can seek an injunction in at a court just to prevent that lapse of memory. Now all that this would seek is to prevent any federal, provincial, or municipal tax dollars to be added to the burdens already agreed to before the IOC pledge over the over runs.
For added legal weight it may be cited that a court has already found that the games are discriminating contrary to our Charter. But this injunction is not conditional to the Games admitting the women skiers to glide on trucked in straw and ice. It is only the side ruling that the games are un-Canadian and outside Canadian jurisdiction that adds the weight to justify not a penny more.
This is in no way any attempt to disrupt the games or to slight them in any way. The more success to them with out our further bailing, would be a good thing. BC’ers and Canadians can watch
with the knowledge that their presence in the spectator seats are not adding to the tax burden. In this lefthanded way it assists the games, even against those vocally opposed to them.
It is meant as a prophylactic device to prevent Canada, BC, and our communities from coming down with historic games fiscal disease. An ailment that has plagued many past venues in Canada and other places. There is also VANOC, its members, and other sponsors that should take the responsible path and shoulder their own load and not on to us.
It is unlikely that any level of government would want to oppose
this injunction. On what grounds or what principles is it not the duty of them all to prevent the escalation of tax waste when it is not in any need in that quarter. Any representing the games or the sponsors raising any objections would be dooming the fate of the very games they pro port to be acting for.
If you know of any person or group interested in this proposition please pass it on, a court date needs to be before any games start to have any positive effect. I think it best be shared among grass roots community groups to keep partisanship out from stirring the intent. They (partisan organizations) may and should offer praise from an arms length distance.