“You simply cannot say, ‘Well it’s this company that broke the rules and not us,’ when in fact it has an impact on the election. I’ve always thought there should be some form of responsibility attached to the party,” said Mr. Kingsley in an interview with The Hill Times. “If there’s a clear indication that they should have known better, if there’s a clear indication that they did not provide any kind of guidance, that type of thing, then there should be responsibility attached to the political party and that might take legal measures.”
Mr. Kingsley was speaking in general terms and did not want to cast aspersions on former Conservative staffer Michael Sona’s innocence or guilt after being charged under the Canada Elections Act for having willfully prevented or endeavoured to prevent an elector from voting at an election.
“We’ll see how the court case evolves, and how the further investigation evolves and who played what role,” he said.
Mr. Sona, who served as communications director to Conservative candidate Marty Burke in the 2011 election, was charged last week as part of Elections Canada’s investigation into allegations of misleading robocalls being placed to electors in the riding of Guelph, Ont., during the election. The calls, which were apparently arranged and carried out by an individual using the alias Pierre Poutine, directed voters to incorrect polling locations.
“I hope that the charges that we filed today will send a strong message that such abuses under the Canada Elections Act will not be tolerated,” said Commissioner of Elections Canada Yves Côté in a news release.
Mr. Sona has hired lawyer Norm Boxall to represent him, and in a statement made April 2, said the charge is “disappointing” but Mr. Sona will be able “to finally address the allegations in court as opposed to in the media and resolve it permanently.”
The statement also said: “I cannot help but comment, that if the government was interested in the public being fully informed and the issue of robocalls properly addressed, a full public inquiry would be called, rather than a charge being laid against a single individual who held a junior position on a single campaign and who clearly lacked the resources and access to the data required to make the robocalls.”
It’s the only statement Mr. Boxall and Mr. Sona will make until the trial begins on May 3.
Mr. Kingsley said the fact that charges have now been laid in connection with the events that transpired in Guelph almost two years ago, has “brought a certain amount of relief that we finally see a court case relating to an investigation.”
NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.), his party’s ethics critic, said he’s “glad to see that charges have been laid,” but said he wants to know more about the exact “scope of what Elections Canada is alleging.” He said he still hopes to see action from the agency on the question of voter fraud in the more than 240 other ridings where instances have been reported to Elections Canada.
Mr. Angus said he doesn’t see how Mr. Sona could have been the “mastermind of something as complex as phone-based voter-fraud,” and said the public needs to know how many people were involved and who orchestrated the calls.
Liberal MP Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, Que.), his party’s democratic reform critic, said his party has for a while been calling for a public inquiry to be held, and said one is needed “to be sure that we don’t single out only one individual. It’s impossible that only one individual would be able to do it alone.” Mr. Dion said he hopes the trial will “bring some light” to the events that transpired during the 2011 election.
Mr. Kinglsey said with Mr. Sona being charged it highlights the need to act upon recommendations made by Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand in his report on the misuse of telecommunications technology during the 2011 election, which was tabled in the House two weeks ago.
“It’s not possible anymore to have read the report without taking into account the accusations that have been levied against Mr. Sona, in the sense that one can see how his recommendations need to be acted upon, certainly in time for the next election, in time for people to be brought up to speed on what the new measures are going to be,” said Mr. Kingsley.
Mr. Mayrand’s report, based on feedback from across the country through a phone survey as well as from an expert panel through an Institute of Research on Public Policy roundtable discussion, made a number of recommendations to deter and prevent the sort of telecommunications misuse that occurred during the 2011 when voters reported receiving misleading, harassing and annoying automated phone calls.
Mr. Mayrand made a number of recommendations, including: that privacy protection principles that govern most Canadian institutions be extended to political parties; that political entities be required to provide more information on their telemarketing services; that it be made an offence under the Canada Elections Act to impersonate an election officer; that the Commissioner of Canada Elections be able to ask a judge to compel someone to provide information for an investigation; that telecommunications companies be required to retain information on services provided to political parties for a certain period of time; and that political parties should develop and adopt codes of conduct to govern both them and their supporters, among other things.
“The issue is not simply one of compliance with legal requirements, but also respect for values of fair play. The line separating conduct that is a normal part of a healthy and vigorous electoral competition from conduct that undermines the legitimacy of the election is at risk of becoming increasingly blurred and uncertain,” reads the report.
Mr. Kingsley said it’s important that legislation addressing the misuse of telecommunications technology be introduced in time for new measures to be understood and integrated well before the expected October 2015 election.
“Whenever there’s an election you need to train people about what the law says, you need to train the candidates, you need to train the parties to educate people, you need to let Canadians know what the rules are going to be,” said Mr. Kingsley. “The government has had one year to think about this and to mull over the Chief Electoral Officers’ [discussion paper].”
Mr. Kingsley said the increased financial penalties recommended by Mr. Mayrand are important suggestions, and said overall, the recommendations have “more teeth.”
In March 2012, the House of Commons unanimously passed a resolution calling on the government to introduce legislation to address the misuse of telecommunications technology by last September.
Democratic Reform Minister Tim Uppal’s (Edmonton-Sherwood Park, Alta.) director of communications Kate Davis said the minister will consider a “wide range of recommendations in advance of the legislation’s introduction,” and said Mr. Mayrand’s recommendations will be “strongly considered.”
“As [the minister] has indicated himself, it is really important to bring forward the legislation sooner rather than later,” Ms. Davis told The Hill Times. “Certainly when the government introduces a proposal there’s every expectation that we hope to see it passed and in place as quickly as possible and before the election.”
Mr. Dion said it’s not enough that legislation be introduced and voted on before the 2015 election, and said it needs to “be fully in place in advance of the election.” Mr. Dion said the fact that it’s taken so long for Mr. Uppal to introduce legislation shows “it’s not a priority for this government.”
Mr. Mayrand’s report also provided a summary by Elections Canada of information already made public about their investigation into misleading and harassing phone calls made during the 2011 election. According to the report, as of March 15, 2013, Elections Canada had received complaints from more than 1,400 electors in 247 ridings across the country, including 252 complaints from the riding of Guelph, Ont.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: LAURA RYCKEWAERT
No comments:
Post a Comment