Tories move to curtail debate on new elections act
OTTAWA — The governing Conservatives moved Wednesday to cut short debate on a new election bill that critics say helps the Tories and weakens oversight by Elections Canada.
House Leader Peter Van Loan gave notice Wednesday afternoon, a day after the 242-page bill was tabled, that the government will vote to send the bill to committee on Thursday, a move that seemed to signal the government plans to push the bill through the legislative process without changes.
Earlier Wednesday, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair predicted the government would cut short debate, denounced the Conservatives as “serial cheaters” and accused them of rigging the rules in their favour.
Opposition MPs began raising pointed questions about clauses of the act that they say will give a ballot-box boost to the Conservatives while reining in the watchdogs at Elections Canada.
While the bill has received endorsement from some observers, such as former chief electoral officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley, opposition parties are expected to challenge provisions that could weaken Elections Canada’s enforcement clout or give the Conservatives any ballot-box advantage.
The most dramatic change in the act is moving the office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections, home of the investigators in charge of enforcing elections law, from Elections Canada to the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
Pierre Poilievre, minister of state for democratic reform, says the move is designed to enhance the independence of investigators. Critics worry that the change may increase the chances of political interference in investigations, since the DPP answers to the government, not Parliament.
“The chief electoral officer is appointed to and is responsible to Parliament, but the DPP is appointed by the attorney general,” said NDP critic Craig Scott. “Why is the government removing parliamentary oversight from the elections commissioner?”
Poilievre replied that only Parliament can fire the DPP: “The government cannot fire him by itself.”
Other provisions expected to draw resistance: ■ The new bill would also restrict the ability of Elections Canada to communicate with voters, narrowing the legal authority of the chief electoral officer, eliminating provisions that allow Elections Canada to promote voting to “persons and groups most likely to experience difficulties in exercising their democratic rights.”
■ In the House on Wednesday, Poilievre suggested it’s best for the agency to leave the job of promoting voting to political parties. Critics have suggested the groups that Elections Canada has targeted in advertising campaigns — such as aboriginals — are less likely to vote for the Conservatives than for opposition parties.
■ The provision that stops Elections Canada from promoting voting also limits the ability of the chief electoral officer to communicate with the public “only” to inform voters about who and where to vote, raising questions about whether he could answer questions about the conduct of elections.
■ The bill would prevent voters from casting ballots without government identification if they are vouched for by another elector. The Conservatives say “vouching” has a much higher level of irregularity than other voting methods and shouldn’t be allowed. Vouched voters account for only an estimated one per cent of all ballots cast and the New Democrats say banning the practice can disenfranchise people without fixed addresses, such as students, the poor and aboriginals — people more likely to vote NDP. Removing voter cards sent out by Elections Canada from the list of valid forms of ID will have a similar effect, the NDP says.
■ Increasing the allowable political contribution from $1,200 to $1,500 annually would appear to give the Conservatives a fundraising advantage. In the past, the Tories have won the fundraising wars by taking smaller amounts from a larger number of donors than other parties. That has changed over the past two years. In 2013, a full 20 per cent of donations to the Conservatives were of the maximum allowable amount of $1,200, compared to 16 per cent of a smaller pool of Liberal donors. Increasing the limit should reap more cash for the Conservatives than the Liberals or NDP if this trend continues.