The allegations are contained in the final report from the Ontario electoral boundary commission that rejected multiple recommendations from Conservative MPs — including House leader Peter Van Loan and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver — for changes to riding borders, and rebuked comments from two Liberal MPs that the commission was corrupted in its decisions.
The harsh words echo those made across the country as MPs have fought the independent commissions over changes to the federal electoral map that will see 30 new seats added to the House of Commons by the 2015 election.
In Saskatchewan, the redrawn map creates strictly urban and rural ridings that could see the Conservatives lose seats in the 2015 vote. In other provinces, boundary lines could cause tension in caucus as politicians who once had hold of their seats find themselves in competition with a fellow MP, said Michael Pal, an election law expert from the University of Toronto.
“The reason there are political shenanigans is because there are political consequences to redrawing the map,” Pal said.
“They’re going to say very partisan things that help their party, or help themselves get re-elected.”
Toronto-area Liberal MPs Jim Karygiannis and John McKay accused the Ontario commission of gerrymandering during their testimony in front of a parliamentary committee reviewing the recommended boundaries. In its final report filed Monday, the Ontario commission noted it was “disappointed” the two had impugned its “independence and integrity.”
“It’s a very political process,” said David McGrane, a political expert from the University of Saskatchewan.
“A certain amount of MP influence is acceptable,” he said. “But where’s that grey line when you cross over . . . into manipulation?”
That line is not clearly drawn in any of the rules overseeing the independent boundaries commissions that review the electoral map every 10 years, McGrane said.
The Ontario commission accused NDP MPs Carol Hughes and Charlie Angus, the party’s ethics critic, of stepping over that line and ratcheted up accusations of “inappropriate involvement” in the redistribution process. The two MPs were cleared of any wrongdoing by a Conservative-dominated parliamentary committee.
The commission’s accusations revolve around a group of Northern Ontario mayors that reversed its position on a boundary line. That reversal brought the group in line with Angus and Hughes, and came about one week after the two MPs testified before the commission.
The commission wrote in its report filed Monday that it didn’t consider the flip-flop “a coincidence” based on the timeline of events. The commission argued the two MPs “were more deeply involved . . . than they chose to admit.”
“While members of Parliament are certainly entitled to participate in public consultation in the electoral boundaries readjustment process, they should be mindful of the risk that overly enthusiastic participation may shade into manipulation,” the report reads.
In an interview, Angus said he spoke with mayors in the affected towns, but didn’t manipulate them into changing their position. He argued the commission had its “nose out of joint” after he and other residents in Northern Ontario challenged the commissioners, who took things personally.
“It is a good process, but if (the commission) wants to take a shot at me, (it) can take a shot at me,” Angus said.
“I make no apologies.”
With Ontario’s commission filing its final report, all 10 provincial commissions have delivered their recommendations to Elections Canada to formally adopt. In all, 15 seats will be added in Ontario. Alberta and British Columbia will receive six each, and Quebec will receive three additional seats.
Many of the new seats were added in suburban areas near cities such as Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto. Alberta and British Columbia’s new boundaries respect the principle of representation by population, while Ontario deviated wildly in some newly redrawn boundaries, Pal said.
Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: Jordan Press
No comments:
Post a Comment