“I’d like to understand what ‘comprehensive’ means. The government doesn’t use words that it doesn’t want to use, and here they’ve used it as a word that pertains to something beyond, in my view. But I don’t know what that could be. I’m hoping and trusting that it will not result in contentious issues that would result in the delay of the legislation,” said former chief electoral officer of Canada Jean-Pierre Kingsley in an interview with The Hill Times. “I hope it’s all related to the same topic and doesn’t introduce contentious topics because you know these bills are very difficult to hive off.”
The government has committed to introducing legislation to reform Canada’s elections laws in response to the robocalls scandal.
Elections Canada’s investigation into reports of misleading automated calls being placed to voters on Election Day 2011 in the riding of Guelph, Ont. is still ongoing, and is in addition to a separate investigation by the agency into other reports of misleading and harassing calls made to voters in a reported 247 electoral districts during the 2011 election.
On April 2, former Conservative staffer Michael Sona, who served as director of communications to Guelph Conservative candidate Marty Burke in the last federal election, was charged under a section of the Canada Elections Act with “having willfully prevented or endeavoured to prevent an elector from voting at an election.”
For months, Mr. Uppal (Edmonton-Sherwood Park, Alta.) has been peppered in the House with questions over the timing and measures to be included in any upcoming government legislation to respond to the misuse of telecommunications technologies during the last federal election.
On March 12, 2012, the House unanimously voted to pass an NDP motion calling on the government to introduce legislation to address the misuse of telecommunications technology during the 2011 election within the next six months—but it’s now been more than half a year past that deadline and the government line has remained the same.
“I’ll only repeat what the minister and the Prime Minister have said, and I’m not going to speculate on exact timing, but certainly…a comprehensive proposal will be put forward in the near future,” Kate Davis, director of communications to Mr. Uppal told The Hill Times last week in response to questions over the scope and content of the anticipated legislation.
On March 27, the same day Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand’s report on Preventing Deceptive Communications with Electors was tabled in the House of Commons to be sent to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee, Mr. Uppal was questioned by reporters over whether any recommendations from Mr. Mayrand’s report would be included in the legislation and said, “We will consider these suggestions as we prepare to put forward a comprehensive elections reform proposal.”
Among the recommendations made in Mr. Mayrand’s report: suggestions to require political parties to develop and adopt codes of conduct to govern parties and supporters; to require political parties to file additional information in their returns to Elections Canada, including details on any relations with telemarketing companies; to make it an offence under the Criminal Code to impersonate an Elections Canada official; and to give Elections Canada investigators additional power to compel witness testimony and other information in the course of an investigation.
Speaking with The Hill Times, Ms. Davis said she “wouldn’t want to infer on the minister’s behalf a meaning behind his comments…but I will say his comments stand. A comprehensive proposal will be put forward in the near future and certainly when the bill is tabled it’ll be clear what’s in the legislation,” said Ms. Davis.
In an interview with The Hill Times earlier this month, Ms. Davis said while Mr. Mayrand’s report’s recommendations would be “strongly considered,” she also said the minister is considering a “wide range of recommendations in advance of the legislation’s introduction.”
In an email to The Hill Times, Liberal MP Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, Que.), his party’s democratic reform critic, said he was concerned the government could introduce legislation designed to force the opposition parties to vote against it.
“I share the concern that ‘comprehensive’ bill may be a device to introduce poison pills that will slow down the process and put the opposition in the obligation to vote against the bill, and then being accused by the government to be against the reform for more transparency and honesty,” wrote Mr. Dion in the email.
But Mr. Dion said the government still has time to introduce the anticipated legislation, and said with two full years before the next election, there is “plenty of time to do it well and on time.”
NDP MP Nathan Cullen (Skeena-Bulkley Valley, Ont.), a member of the House Affairs Committee, said while it’s “hard to speculate just based on them saying comprehensive,” he said the repeated use of the adjective “does give me some apprehension,” and he said “they do choose their words carefully.”
Mr. Cullen said he doesn’t see any “urgency” from the Conservatives, and said there is “simply a lack of political will and total arrogance coming from the government,” who he said “seem happy” to leave potential flaws in Canada’s electoral system.
“I mean there’s no reasons for the delay. They voted for the motion that we presented, we have Craig Scott’s bill that does much of the work for the government. They’ve completely run out of excuses and so now they’re just ragging the puck,” said Mr. Cullen.
NDP MP Craig Scott (Toronto-Danforth, Ont.), his party’s democratic reform critic, introduced private member’s bill, Bill C-453, to amend the Canada Elections Act to work to prevent fraudulent election calls, in October, but it has yet to move past first reading. A private member’s bill introduced by Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, N.B.) on May 30, Bill C-424, which sought to amend the Canada Elections Act to increase fines for certain offences, was voted down by 153 Conservative MPs on Nov. 21, including Mr. Uppal.
In response to questions about why Mr. Uppal had voted the bill down, Ms. Davis said the government had “already promised to look at reform and put forward a comprehensive proposal of our own.”
Mr. Kingsley said he could understand that the government might have been waiting to see the recommendations made in Mr. Mayrand’s report, but he said now that the report has landed, and with legislation having been anticipated by the House six months ago, the government can’t wait “all that long to react to it,” said Mr. Kingsley.
Mr. Kingsley said Elections Canada, political parties, and their candidates, and relevant members of the private sector, such as telecommunications companies, would all have to work to implement the sorts of changes that are anticipated in the government’s legislation, and while he said he didn’t think “it would be a lot of work for any one of those groups,” he said sooner is still better than later.
Peter Rosenthal, a law professor at the University of Toronto with expertise in Canadian election law, said when it comes to elections law, when putting in place new provisions or requirements, it’s important the changes are understood by everyone involved.
“So it’s important to not only have it in place, but also understood by Elections Canada and for them to, in their publications, to make it understandable to the general public and to people who work for political parties,” said Prof. Rosenthal.
“Obviously, the telemarketing companies would have to be made aware of their responsibility, but again, that can be done very quickly in the electronic age that we live in. It’s just a question of will to do it, if the Harper government regarded it as important to implement these changes, they could do it very quickly, have it in place within a matter of a couple of months,” said Prof. Rosenthal.
Mr. Mayrand has recommended persons found guilty of impersonating an Elections Canada official face a maximum $250,000 fine or five years of imprisonment if it’s an indictable conviction, or a maximum $50,000 fine or two years of imprisonment if it’s a summary conviction. He also recommended that telemarketing companies be required to maintain information about services provided during an election for at least a year after an election; and that they be required to “preserve specified records.”
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: LAURA RYCKEWAERT
No comments:
Post a Comment