ROTHENBURGER – What about this idea of candidates donating their pay?

THE ELECTION for mayor is more interesting now that Ray Dhaliwal has officially launched his campaign. He announced he’ll join the race, competing against Nelly Dever, incumbent Reid Hamer-Jackson and Mike O’Reilly.

One of his promises has been getting quite a bit of attention: he’ll donate a third of his mayor’s pay to some sort of fund “dedicated to supporting citizens in Kamloops during challenging periods in life.”

It’s the first specific promise anybody’s made so far in this year’s campaign but it remains to be seen if it will have any impact. Indeed, is it a good move at all?

First of all, let’s dispense with the idea that, in effect, it amounts to an attempt to bribe the electorate. It isn’t, any more than any other promise made by a politician. A politician can do what he or she wants with their paycheque. Dhaliwal is probably trying to make the point that being mayor is more about service than money.

He’s not going to be elected just because he wants to donate part of his salary. He, like any candidate, must prove he has the right stuff, and the right policies on a wide range of social, economic and leadership issues.

It doesn’t sound as though Dhaliwal has thoroughly considered how his new fund would work. First of all, City Hall can’t just dock his pay and put it into a fund run by the City. These kinds of funds need to be governed, with accountability for deciding who would qualify.

Coun. Margot Middleton pledged four years ago to donate her stipend to charity, and said later she’s done so but refused to say where the money went. She doesn’t seem to have made the same promise for her re-election campaign this year but maybe I just missed it.

It’s possible she intends to do so again but stay quiet about it.

In the interests of full disclosure, I have some familiarity with this sort of thing. A few years ago, when I was serving on the TNRD board, I tried to refuse what I felt was an inappropriately high raise the board gave itself. Keep my raise, I said. Can’t do it, I was told — it would require a legislated change to the remuneration for the electoral area I represented, which would affect every future director for that area.

So, I took the amount of the raise and donated it to various good causes in Area P. And published lists of where those donations went. (By the way, it was about principle, not political advantage; I didn’t run in the next election.)

In my view, that’s a different situation than putting it into a campaign promise before an election. The reasons were different.

Then there’s the sanctions against Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson levied by the Kamloops council, which have resulted in severe cuts to his stipend. But that’s a whole other story.

Dhaliwal is well-meaning, I’m sure. But nobody should vote for any candidate based on a promise to accept less pay. Let’s not forget that Donald Trump accepts only a token $1 per year for being president; how’s that working out?

So, when it comes to political promises, this is one that should properly be ignored in favour of actual issues and qualifications.

Mel Rothenburger is a former regular contributor to CFJC-TV and CBC radio, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, writes for the Kamloops Chronicle and is a recipient of the Jack Webster Foundation Lifetime Achievement Award, and was a Webster Foundation Commentator of the Year finalist. He has served as mayor of Kamloops, school board chair and TNRD director, and is a retired daily newspaper editor.  He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.