Term limit idea may be better as a referendum
By Medicine Hat News Opinon on May 11, 2018.
This week a small majority of councillors voted against limiting terms on council and the ensuing debate has revealed some surprising positions.
Councillors have a vested interest in the status quo so the question of term limits may have been more appropriate put to the public in a referendum.
Some of the reasons for voting against the motion, brought forward by Coun. Kris Samraj, were interesting. There were those who felt it would take away democratic options for voters, it was called “an attack on the people who serve this community,” and that is “robs” voters of their right to freedom of choice.
One councillor said term limits may be more appropriate at higher levels of government where politicians can make a “career” of it but that’s not the case here considering the salaries of our part-time councillors.
It is worth looking at local councillors’ remuneration to see if it potentially is a motivation to serve multiple terms.
Based on a story in the News in 2016 councillors said they spend between 12 and 40 hours a week on council business. Depending on those hours they receive between $17.54 and $32 per hour remuneration. Not bad for a second job or a retirement income, which is what it is for some councillors.
The mayor’s position is full-time with a base salary of $68,500 plus $34,300 in benefits, for a total of $102,800. Councillors have a base salary of $22,800 plus benefits of $11,400, for a total of $34,200. In 2016 the News revealed the actual compensation for councillors ranged from $42,000 to $46,000.
This is not to suggest that councillors seek election for the money. It is a nice addition to any budget though and if you suddenly had to reduce your income by this amount it would leave a considerable hole not easily filled by a second job in retail.
Benefits and allowances include Canada Pension Plan, extended health, dental and vision coverage with 100 per cent of the premium paid by the city, group life insurance, accidental disability and dismemberment insurance, expense allowances, car allowance of 46 cents per km for out-of-town trips, a per diem of $150 a day when attending to city business beyond the borders of Medicine Hat, gross honoraria travel allowances, professional memberships and tuition.
It would be difficult to say whether seeking re-election is any easier for incumbents. If you are really well known in the community there may be an advantage in being able to depend on a group of friends/associates who will vote for you — or it may not.
Around the world we have recently seen sophisticated methods employed to win elections and not necessarily nefarious. We have also seen political leaders “cling” to power when it suits them.
That term limits rob voters of freedom of choice is a rather surprising point of view. Voters in Zimbabwe would probably say they were robbed of freedom because there was no term limit for Robert Mugabe who clung to power like many dictators for far too many years.
The U.S. limits the number of terms a president can serve. For those who believe President Trump won the election unfairly there is at least this — even if he wins the next election that would be it.
Clearly experience makes it easier to serve as a councillor but it can hamper progress too. Fresh faces can bring new vision and provoke debate that has previously been quashed. Term limits also restrict alliances with specific group that have the potential to sway council’s decisions.
(Gillian Slade is a News reporter. To comment on this and other editorials, go to https://www.medicinehatnews.com/opinions, email her at gslade@medicinehatnews.com or call her at 403-528-8635.)
