Vaughn Palmer: B.C. premier pivots on reason for snap election

VICTORIA — Premier David Eby drew the first question of this week’s leaders’ debate, and was asked the rationale for what is proving to be the most controversial decision of his political career.

“Nearly two-thirds of British Columbians say it is too soon for another election,” began moderator Shachi Kurl of the Angus Reid Institute. “How can anyone believe this snap election is anything less than an opportunistic power grab?”

On the day he called the election, Eby had overwhelmingly justified it as necessary to defend B.C. against the tariffs and attacks of U.S. President Donald Trump.

That argument failed to persuade the electorate. So he has now pivoted, saying the primary reason was to rectify the NDP’s too-meagre seat count in the legislature.

“When you have a one-seat majority, every vote could bring down the government,” argued Eby. “This was not a government that was able to deliver the big swings that you and your family need the government to be taking for you.”

Alas, for the math-challenged NDP leader, when he called the election he had a three-seat majority in the provincial legislature. Moreover, to then create a four-seat gap over the combined opposition, he needed only to call a byelection in vacant Vancouver-Strathcona, the safest NDP seat in the province.

Eby’s second rationale for the snap election call was no more persuasive or less desperate than the first.

Still, it was breathtaking to contemplate the sudden disappearance of the hated Trump.

During a Sept. 22 news conference where the NDP leader announced the election, he made 20 separate references to Trump by name.

In the leaders’ debate Wednesday, Eby named Trump just once, when he heckled Conservative leader Lorne Doerkson for failing to acknowledge the impact of the latest tariffs on softwood lumber.

From 20 references to one. Now that is what I call a pivot.

Eby faced a follow-up question about a related controversy with his early election call.

“Local politicians implored you not to do this. You went ahead anyway. Candidates are now reporting widespread voter confusion. Why should voters see this as effective leadership instead of a failure to listen?”

True to form, Eby ignored the question and instead repeated the need to improve his supposed one-seat majority.

However, on the eve of the leaders’ debate, Doerkson promised a change to ensure no repeat of Eby’s overlap.

“David Eby scheduled some advance voting days at the exact same time as municipal voting day. That was not an accident. It was a calculation, and an irresponsible and selfish one,” said Doerkson by news release.

“If British Columbians choose to make me their next premier, one of our first acts will be to pass a law to make sure this never happens again. Voters need space to hear from the people who want to represent them. Candidates need a fair chance to be heard.”

The Conservatives would introduce a “Respect Local Democracy Act” to permanently separate the provincial and municipal election calendars, so they are never scheduled for the same fall again. It will also bar any provincial election, snap or scheduled, from being held within 60 days of municipal elections.

B.C.’s existing fixed election law already provides for a once-every-four-years provincial vote to be rescheduled if it overlaps with a federal or local government election.

Instead, the election would be held on a date that the premier and cabinet “determines to be suitable after consulting the Chief Electoral Officer, the leader of the Opposition and each leader of a recognized political party.”

Ironically, Eby himself introduced the obligation to consult other party leaders when he was attorney-general in the John Horgan NDP government. But it applies only to the provision for an election to be held every four years on the third Saturday in October.

Eby was under no obligation to consult anyone before calling an election two years earlier than necessary. Nor, to hear some New Democrats tell it, did he listen to cooler heads in his own party, who wanted to hold off.

Near the end of the leaders’ debate, Eby was asked if he could work with the other parties in the event none secures a majority.

He hedged.

“I will be frank. I have a hard time imagining working with this iteration of the Conservative party,” said Eby, citing what he regards as the party’s tolerance of racism, homophobia and disregard for human rights.

The NDP leader called the early election, believing he could catch the Conservatives divided and unready. Instead, the pure cynicism of his timing, mostly united that party behind Doerkson.

Eby now says if he is returned to government in any capacity, he can’t imagine working with the Conservatives as Opposition.

Yet opinion polls suggest that his rushed election call may relegate the NDP to Opposition and install the Conservatives as the next government.