Independent journalist Kim Siever announced today that he’s running in this year’s federal election. Unlike other candidates who have already announced, however, he won’t be running under a party banner.
After being rejected by the NDP party as a candidate for being too prolific and provocative online, Siever decided to run as an independent.
“While the NDP might see my tendency to take bold stances as a liability, I see it as a strength,” said Siever. “I believe that voters will see my tendency to speak my mind and to not be afraid to say the truth as a good thing.”
Running as an independent has its pros and cons. The biggest downside to not having the backing of a large political party is Siever’s inability to make large, expensive campaign promises. He can’t tell voters that he’ll give them tax breaks or reduce regulations or implement universal pharmacare.
On the other hand, he won’t be forced by a party whip to get in line and vote with a party in the House of Commons. He’s free to vote for what he sees as best for the constituents of Lethbridge and the surrounding county.
“Too often,” Siever added, “those we elect to represent us seem to be more interested in representing their party. And while sometimes what that party wants might align with what the community wants, that’s not always the case. It’s time we put people over party.”
Siever intends to run what he calls “a lean campaign”. With being unable to make big promises, he has chosen to focus his campaign on one principle: solidarity.
If elected, Siever promises to stand in solidarity with workers, the marginalized, and the environment.
He claims to be the only candidate in the current slate who has repeatedly stood on the picket line with workers, regardless of their political stripes. Siever says that regardless of whether workers vote on the left or the right, all workers deserve the right to advocate against large employers who don’t want to recognize worker freedoms that are guaranteed by the constitution.
Siever is passionate about standing up for those who are marginalized by society. This passion is driven by his Christian faith, whose founder embraced and defended those who were rejected by society. His advocacy has been seen in his volunteer work with such initiatives and programmes as the soup kitchen and SAGE Clan, as well as attending vigils for the victims of the Québec City Mosque shooting and the victims of residential schools, marching in the Pride parade and with Sisters in Spirit organizers, and attending rallies for immigrants and GSAs.
Finally, he understands how critical the environment is to Lethbridge and area. The land and water feeds each of us, but it makes possible for the farms and ranches of Southern Alberta to feed the world. Taking care of our natural resources means that we can ensure that the land can sustain us and provide with sources of recreation and joy for generations to come. The Lethbridge weather has grown drier and hotter over the last 100 years, and reversing that trend is the key for securing a better natural world for our grandchildren.
Siever also has a deep commitment to the community, which he has demonstrated over the last two decades through serving on over 2 dozens boards, committees, and panels, ranging from neighbourhood building and the arts to transportation and economic development.
You can read more about Siever and his campaign at kimsiever.ca/election.
The federal election will occur on Monday, September 20, 2021. Advanced polling will occur 10–13 September. Visit the Elections Canada website for information on voting by mail and voting at the Elections Canada office.
12 replies on “Kim Siever running as independent in 2021 federal election”
I wish you well on your campaign, Kim. You are a candidate who does his homework on the issues and stays well-informed.
Thank you!
Kudos to you Kim for stepping forward as a candidate in the upcoming federal election, and best wishes for a successful campaign. Hopefully being a Member of Parliament won’t prevent you from continuing to publish your very topical, informative, fact-based and well-researched stories!
Thanks, Doug. If elected, I’d still plan to publish, but my focus might change. 🙂
Good for you Kim. Let’s hope someone with strong views like yourself who supports working people can make inroads into our political system.
Thanks, Ron. I sure hope so!
I would vote for you in a heartbeat, especially after reading about your concern about caring for the land that feeds the world. Your writing has been excellent and informative. All the best in your campaign.
Thank you, Wendy!
Hey — something just occurred to me — does this mean that my September monthly donation will qualify as a federal political donation for tax purposes? (Just kidding 😉 )
Ha ha! I think that works only for parties. Appreciate the long-time support though, Doug!
I have long felt that political parties are a scourge on democracy and would love to support an independent candidate, provided that candidate generally shares the same values as me.
Having said that, this election I have only one issue of concern, and that is the gross negligence and disastrous mismanagement that the government has been guilty of through this pandemic. What is your stance on the measures the government has taken in response to the Covid-19 pandemic? Are you supportive of vaccine passports?
I am generally supportive of the response of the federal government to the pandemic; however, I think it exposed some weaknesses in the system.
For example, our long-term care system must be reformed. We need better sickness leave options for workers. Our healthcare system is inadequate, and we should create universal pharmacare, dental care, and vision care and improve access to mental health care. We need a guaranteed living income programme and improved employment insurance. And we need to increase Old Age Security and improve the pension programme. Finally, we need to improve affordable social housing for people.
I see the ability to show proof of vaccine to access facilities or events as a good thing, until at least we receive much higher levels of public vaccination.