Up until Friday, June 7, Mr. Scheer’s (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.) office had indicated to news media that he would not take “any action” until the two court cases launched by Conservative MPs James Bezan (Selkirk-Interlake, Man.) and Shelly Glover (Saint Boniface, Man.) were settled, which in Mr. Bezan’s case, would be at the earliest the fall.
But, clearing up confusion on Tuesday over an email from Mr. Scheer’s office to The Hill Times, a spokeswoman said Mr. Scheer will rule on interventions by opposition MPs, with the latest being NDP MP Craig Scott (Toronto-Danforth, Ont.) on Monday evening in the Commons, regardless of what transpires in the legal action.
Among other things, Mr. Scott argued the privileges of all MPs will be violated as long as the two MPs continue to sit in the House and vote on legislation and other measures while they are in violation of Election Act campaign expense reporting provisions at the centre of the court cases.
As well, both opposition parties have disputed a decision by Mr. Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.) not to table letters from Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand stating the Elections Act stipulates neither Mr. Bezan nor Ms. Glover may continue to sit or vote in the Commons until they file corrected election expense returns that reflect the expenses Elections Canada argues should be included in their reports.
Although Mr. Scheer may rule on the wider question of whether the House has the right to decide whether the two Conservatives may continue sitting and voting in the Commons, Mr. Scheer indicated in a statement to the Commons last Friday that he has no obligation to table the letters from Mr. Mayrand.
“I believe that the responsibility for putting into the public domain the correspondence initiated by the chief electoral officer rests with the chief electoral officer,” Mr. Scheer said. “This he has done and continues to do on an ongoing basis by making available for consultation in his office a wide range of documents that is Election Canada’s practice to make public. I trust this clarifies the chair’s approach to the situation for all Members.”
Mr. Scott argued on Monday night that although Elections Canada allowed journalists to view and distribute copies of the documents on the internet, MPs must be able to view the originals as part of their deliberations on whether the two MPs should be allowed to continue to sit and vote in the House.
Although there have been reports that Mr. Mayrand had asked Mr. Scheer that the two MPs be suspended from the House, Mr. Mayrand’s letter pointed out the Elections Act provision stipulating the MPs could not vote or sit in the Chamber because they had failed to comply with Mr. Mayrand’s requests for corrections to their campaign returns.
“While the chief electoral officer’s role includes ensuring that electoral campaign returns of candidates properly reflect their election expenses, the chief electoral officer has no mandate regarding the application (of the Elections Act section covering suspension from the Commons) and has always deferred to the House of Commons in this regard,” Deputy Chief Electoral Officer Stephane Perrault said in a May 27 letter to Mr. Mayrand.
In Mr. Bezan’s case, a corrected return accounting for the full election campaign value of permanent billboards he had installed in his riding prior to the past three federal elections would bring his campaign expenses to $3,485 over the $102,602 Elections Canada limit for the election in the riding, according to a schedule in a letter from Mr. Mayrand to Mr. Bezan’s lawyer, Conservative Party of Canada lawyer Arthur Hamilton.
Elections Canada had also asked Mr. Bezan, first elected to the Commons in 2004, to correct his candidate expense returns for the 2006 and 2008 federal elections to take into account the higher value for the permanent billboards, which Mr. Bezan kept up during the election periods.
Ms. Glover, a former Winnipeg police officer who was first elected in 2008 and is now Parliamentary Secretary to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Oshawa, Ont.), reported campaign expenses of $81,426, and her corrected return, involving what Elections Canada claims are underestimated costs for the use of a riding association website and also costs for permanent signs in her riding, would take her campaign over its expense limit of $82,086.
A hearing in her appeal of the Elections Canada position is scheduled to be first heard in Manitoba’s Court of Queen’s Bench on June 20, while an initial hearing for Mr. Bezan’s appeal is scheduled for Sept. 12.
The Commons could adjourn as early as the end of this week for its three-month summer recess, which is likely to be extended if, as expected, Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) asks Governor General David Johnston to prorogue Parliament in late August or early September to pave the way for a Throne Speech later in the fall as the Conservatives begin laying groundwork for the next federal election in 2015.
Liberal MPs told The Hill Times they believe it is only the House of Commons, not Mr. Scheer, or Mr. Mayrand, or the courts, that has the authority to decide whether Mr. Bezan and Ms. Glover should be allowed to vote and sit in the House until the dispute is resolved.
“Our point of order and our beef is that it’s not up to him [the Speaker] to decide, it’s up to the House to decide on this matter,” said Liberal MP Scott Andrews (Avalon, Nfld.).
“It’s not up to the government, it’s not up to Elections Canada, if you look at the statute, the statute is clear, it’s the House itself will decide whether these two Members can sit and vote,” Mr. Andrews said.
“It would come to a vote in the House. We know, but let’s stand in the House and let these Conservatives stand up for more election fraud, that’s what this comes down to,” he said, a reference apparently to ineligible 2011 election expenses that forced former Labrador Conservative MP Peter Penashue to resign, charges that were laid against a Conservative campaign assistant in the riding of Guelph, Ont., from the 2011 election, and 2011 guilty pleas by the Conservative Party to charges of failing to report national campaign advertising expenses for the 2006 election that Elections Canada argued would have taken the party $1-million over its spending limit.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment