The head of a right-wing lobby group that recently launched a controversial internet attack ad against interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae and drew much of its financial support from Conservative Party donors over the past two elections says his connections to Prime Minister Stephen Harper are unrelated to the group’s political campaigns.
OTTAWA—The head of a right-wing lobby group that recently launched a controversial internet attack ad against interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae and drew much of its financial support from Conservative Party donors over the past two elections says his connections to Prime Minister Stephen Harper are unrelated to the group’s political campaigns.
National Citizens Coalition President Peter Coleman, who was treasurer when Mr. Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) was its president from 1997 to 2001, say his lobby group was not acting in support of Mr. Harper and the Conservative Party when it launched the attack against Mr. Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) a week ago.
And—even though Mr. Harper, when he was the NCC president, went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada to fight election law limits against campaign spending by the NCC and other third parties in federal elections—Mr. Coleman recently told a radio interviewer “there has never been any proof” that money influences elections in Canada.
Mr. Coleman, in an interview with a conservative talk-show radio host at Calgary’s CHQR, said his organization’s You Tube attack ad against Mr. Rae was intended to help the Liberal party by swaying party members against choosing Mr. Rae as their permanent leader, not to lend support to the Conservatives and Mr. Harper.
“The last thing the Liberal Party needs is a drunken sailor like Bob Rae, spending the way he did when he was premier of Ontario,” Mr. Coleman told CHQR host Dave Rutherford last Thursday. Mr. Coleman said Mr. Rae, Ontario’s NDP premier from 1990 to 1995, “has been a punching bag for us for 20 years.”
The radio interview appears to have been Mr. Coleman’s only comments, other than emailed responses to questions from The Hill Times, on the controversy the ad began when it was posted on the final day of the recent Liberal convention in Ottawa, and on related subsequent stories about Conservative party contributors who also donated to the National Citizens Coalition for third-party advertisements as it campaigned against the opposition parties in the past two federal elections.
Conservatives and commentators have countered that other third parties in election campaigns have opposed the government. The filed of third parties has been large over the past several elections, and include national and provincial labour unions. But the Canadian Labour Congress and the Canadian Autoworkers union, which have taken part in the past, reported no election expenses last year. Among several unions and interest groups who took part, the Public Service Alliance of Canada reported $131,175 in election expenses. The Canadian Shooting Sports Association, one of the most vocal opponents of the federal long gun registry, reported $7,414 in election expenses.
Mr. Coleman’s National Citizens Coalition reported $48,576 in expenses for the 2011 election, twice what it spent in 2008 and the most it has spent following the Supreme Court ruling on Mr. Harper's unsuccessful challenge.
A Hill Times review of the contribution and elections expense reports posted at Elections Canada found eight NCC donors who gave substantial amounts of money to the NCC after contributing the maximum allowable to the Conservative Party for those election years.
The list of names included Gwynn Morgan, a former oil company executive and close friend to Mr. Harper who gave $20,000 to the NCC during the 2008 election and also donated the maximum of $1,000 to the Conservative party that year.
The Conservatives, as with the other major parties, had an election expense ceiling of $18-million, and opposition MPs say Conservative supporters were able to extend their financial support to the party by donating to the National Citizens Coalition, which placed ads criticizing the opposition parties and candidates. The NCC increased both its donations and the amount it spent for the May 2 federal election last year.
Both Mr. Coleman and Mr. Rutherford criticized the federal Liberal and NDP parties during the radio show, with Mr. Rutherford starting the program off saying “many people in the Central Canadian media detest Conservatives” as he introduced Mr. Coleman, and criticized Liberals and New Democrats through the exchange.
Apparently responding to opposition allegations that the NCC likely maintains links with Mr. Harper, who when he was president went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada in an attempt to have Elections Act limits to third-party campaign spending struck down, Mr. Coleman acknowledged his past relations with the prime minister, but suggested they have no bearing on the NCC’s role in federal election campaigns, or the attack against Mr. Rae.
“Of course I know Stephen Harper,” he told Mr. Rutherford. “I was there as treasurer when we hired him as vice-president, that’s just the way it is. I consider Harper a friend, not a best friend, I don’t talk to him all the time, but I worked with the guy. I mean of course I know the fellow, I mean that’s just reality.”
Mr. Coleman also reiterated the NCC’s position against any limit on third-party election campaign spending and insisted, despite the Coalition’s own attempt to sway voters with campaign advertising, that money can influence election outcomes in Canada
“There’s never been any proof in this country that anybody’s ever able to influence an election campaign with [by] spending money,” he said. “It’s a bunch of BS for politicians to say it happens, because it just does not happen.”
Liberal MPs questioned Mr. Coleman’s claim money can’t sway election outcomes, and also his attempt to distance himself from Mr. Harper.
“He should grow up, Mr. Coleman, thank you very much, please don’t insult out intelligence,” Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough-Agincourt, Ont.) said about Mr. Coleman’s statement that the attack against Mr. Rae was motivated by concern over the future of the Liberal Party. “He’s not listening to his master’s voice, he’s not listening to his boss, right. That’s why they’ve got the same people contributing.”
Liberal MP John McCallum (Markham, Ont.) scoffed at Mr. Coleman’s claim that money, apparently spent either by third parties, candidates or parties, doesn’t influence elections in Canada.
“Then why does he bother spending the money if it doesn’t do anything, why does he spend on advertising in this way if he doesn’t think it has any effect?” Mr. McCallum said. “It doesn’t make sense.”
Mr. McCallum said relentless and expensive Conservative attack ads against then Liberal leaders Michael Ignatieff and Stéphane Dion (Saint Laurent-Cartierville, Que.) likely affected the views of voters.
“I don’t know if there’s hard proof, but there’s certainly a lot of evidence that the Conservative negative characterization of Dion and Ignatieff, which cost a lot of money, had an effect on Canadians’ perceptions of those two leaders” Mr. McCallum said. “That’s why we in the Liberal party are raising money specifically for our new leader, whoever that might be, to defend against such attacks.”
Meanwhile, the NCC’s director Stephen Taylor told The Hill Times Tuesday that the ad attacking Mr. Rae has resulted in a wave of contributions to the NCC, which on Tuesday distributed a fundraising letter to supporters in a pitch for more cash.
The letter, from Mr. Taylor, focused on the stories and commentary about the NCC that were inspired by the original attack ad.
“The Ottawa establishment is downright hostile to people who think like you and me,” Mr. Taylor wrote, providing a copy of the letter to The Hill Times. Mr. Taylor's letter includes a link to Mr. Coleman's CHQR interview.
Mr. Taylor accused the NDP and Liberals of attacking the National Citizens Coalition, and jointly planning a law that would restrict third-party advertising even further, between elections as well as the current restrictions during campaigns.
“Speaking out against politicians is the essence of free speech, not to mention our democracy,” he wrote. “And now, this left-wing cabal wants to silence us just because they do not like what we have to say.”
None of the Liberals or New Democrats who spoke to The Hill Timessaid they were working together or calling for a law to ban third-party advertising between elections.
Original Article
Source: Hill Times
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment