It was announced on Wednesday that former Saanich mayor, Fred Haynes and Victoria city council hopeful Janice Williams are being fined by Elections BC.
Haynes is being fined a total of $150 for, “sponsoring election advertising without an authorization statement.”
According to a letter Haynes received from Elections BC, a complainant informed Elections BC that they had seen an advertisement in the Saanich News on August 31st encouraging votes for Haynes in the upcoming election that were missing an authorization statement.
The issue is that candidates are only legally allowed to begin their campaigning for the election on September 17th.
“The Elections BC Investigator reviewed the Saanich News E‐editions and noted that in addition to the August 31st ad, there was also a similar ad on August 24th, that likewise did not have an authorization statement. Both ads ran on page A 3 of the Saanich News,” Elections BC said in their letter to Haynes.
“When the Investigator reached out to you, you cooperatively contacted Saanich News and had the E‐Edition of the ads corrected to include the missing authorization statement.”
The investigator found that because the offence was not an egregious one and Haynes cooperated fully with Elections BC, the fine would be less than $500. Other factors had the investigator determine $150 would be an appropriate fine.
In Williams’ case, she was fined $100 by Elections BC for the same reasons as Haynes, “sponsoring election advertising without an authorization statement.”
She also received a letter informing her of the fine on Wednesday.
“On August 27, 2022, Elections BC received a complaint regarding an internet ad that promoted Janice Williams for Victoria City Council, published on the website, ‘Island Social Trends’,” stated a letter to Williams fromElections BC.
“On August 30, 2022, Elections BC received a separate complaint regarding an ad promoting Janice Williams for Victoria City Council, posted in an Elevator. Both ads lacked full authorization statements.”
Similarly to Haynes case, the offence was deemed non-egregious and the fine was set at $100.
