When the B.C. Liberals made history by becoming the first province in Canada to set fixed election dates, they took a large element of surprise out of provincial politics.
One of the side effects of that is that campaign season is in full swing much sooner. As we noted last week, the public no longer has to guess if the government's shoveling the cash off the back of the truck means we're going to the polls soon. Now, with the last legislative session of the New Era in progress, we're seeing the battle lines for the coming election campaign form. The government's "Golden Decade" theme in its throne speech and its recent something-for-everyone spending announcements and feel-good goals are clear indicators the Liberals want to campaign on the future, not their record. The NDP, on the other hand, will be bringing up the past - but will have their own history to fight at the same time.
In municipal politics, on the other hand, fixed election dates are old hat. Still, for the most part, election fever doesn't usually take hold until the fall, thanks in large part to the natural break of summer holidays.
But not in Squamish. Thanks to the decision by Mayor Ian Sutherland to go to the voters this month for $20 million to build a whole host of community amenities, we strongly suspect campaign season has already begun here as well - and if the scrapping on council and the tone of the letters pages is any indication, this, too, will be an ugly campaign.
You'd think that a proposal to build a whole bevy of much-needed community facilities would be a slam-dunk yes - especially when they're presented as one package, not in competition with each other.
But it's clear the big price tag, combined with the District's self-professed inability to provide chapter-and-verse spending on the amenities is the big stumbling block for many people. Combined with cost overruns and funding uncertainty tied to other major public building projects of late, opposition to the $20-million question is focusing not on whether or not these facilities are desirable, but if this council can be trusted with the money to build them. Consequently, the vote is breathing life into those who disagree with this council's focus and direction - life that didn't seem possible even a few months ago.
In the last election, Sutherland's main rival, Paul Lalli, made fiscal responsibility his main campaign plank, but it didn't seem to resound with voters at the time, who were in the mood for change. This time could be very different.
It certainly wasn't intentional, but the vote on Feb. 26 may well shape up not as a referendum on facilities, but as a poll on council's progress.
