Creating Communities. Connecting People
Welcome, Guest      Bookmark and Share
Tell a friend about this site Invite    
LGN News Headlines - RSS feed - Add to Google

Wed, Apr 23rd - 7:17AM

Canadian Prime Minister Flip Flops on Election Rigging Scandal

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has flip-flopped on the recent election rigging scandal. Stephen Harper denies Conservatives committed fraud by using Elections Canada to pay for their television advertising.

In 2000, as head of the National Citizens Coalition, Stephen Harper led an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada against election spending limits for third parties.

He opposed such limits, and lost. The Supreme Court in 2004 held that "the overarching objective of the spending limits is electoral fairness." Spending limits exist, in its words, to "level the playing field" so that parties with significant financial resources cannot "dominate the political discourse."

Now jump ahead to 2006. Harper is leader of the opposition and has an election to fight. Nationally, spending limits for each party have been set at $18.5 million. Locally, limits vary but are about $70,000 for each riding.

National TV ads are expensive. The Conservative party needs more money to pay for them. A decision is made. If it were to give local ridings money, which it can do, those ridings could give that money right back to it – "in-and-out," as Elections Canada would later describe the scheme – to buy TV time locally in order to run ads that would be identical to its national ads except that, at the end of each ad at the bottom of the TV screen, in small print, would appear the words, "Paid for by (name of local candidate)."

In this way, according to Conservative party thinking, it could have ads with no less of a national message, and impact, but paid for by local campaigns. So instead of being able to spend only $18.5 million nationally, it could spend much more.

Wait – it gets better. After each election, by law, every local campaign is entitled to receive a rebate from Elections Canada based on what that campaign spent. In this instance, according to Conservative party logic, because this "in-and-out" money would be considered local money, the rebate received by each participating riding would be that much higher.

For example, a riding that would otherwise have spent only $30,000 on its local campaign, having received an additional $40,000 from the Conservative party, then giving it right back for the TV ads, would be deemed to have spent $70,000, entitling it to receive $42,000 as a rebate instead of $18,000.

For each riding that would mean having more money to pay off the debts of that campaign, more money for the next election, then more "in-and-out" money during the next election – election after election. The money would come from Elections Canada, which means, of course, from the taxpayer, which means, of course, from you and me.

But this isn't what Elections Canada intended. Spending limits exist, as the Supreme Court stated, so that "no one voice is overwhelmed by another."

Elections Canada set national and local limits for this same reason. It also intended that national spending be for national purposes, and local spending for local purposes.

Imagine for a minute that the Conservatives' position is correct, and that "in-and-out" transactions are allowable. It would then be possible for the national Conservative campaign to "encourage" every local riding in the country, all 308 of them, to receive, then send back, not just $40,000 of their $70,000 local spending limit, but $60,000 or more.

It would mean, all for the price of a small tag line at the end of an ad – "Paid for by (name of local candidate)" – that the national campaign could spend to its $18.5 million limit, plus (say) $60,000 multiplied by 308 ridings, or another almost $18.5 million – in total, $37 million.

It would also mean that each local riding, having spent its limit of $70,000, would receive a rebate of $42,000 to spend between election campaigns, for pamphlets, for local or national "in-and-out" ads. So that when the next campaign began, much of their local spending limit could again go "in-and-out" for the purposes of the national campaign.

When something is too good to be true, no matter how hard you spin it to Elections Canada, to the courts, or to the Canadian people, usually it is.

There is a principle that applies to all facets of our common law that you can't do indirectly what is expressly prohibited directly. The Elections Act, in a specific provision, even states this principle directly. The "in-and-out" nature of the Conservatives' arrangements seems, ahem, fishy.

It suggests, at best, a mind that isn't quite sure of the rightness of what it is doing. As well, it seems in some cases as if these "in-and-out" transactions happened too fast for the Conservative party's national office and their local candidates to get their stories straight. Some candidates, in Elections Canada affidavits filed in Court, said that the reason they were making these "in-and-out" transactions was to contribute to the national ad buy.


Elections Canada has ruled that for advertising to be considered local, it must directly promote that local candidate or oppose his or her opponent, so that "Paid for by Candidate X" would have to be understood as "direct promotion."

Beyond all this is a far larger problem for the Conservatives – Stephen Harper. Besides his repeated comments about the courts and judiciary, and his oft-demonstrated attitude of "I want to do what I want to do, and I'm going to do it," it is his 2000 court case, Harper v. Canada, the leading case in the field, that ended up in the Supreme Court of Canada.

He brought it. He fought it. He lost it. He knows the issue of spending limits backward and forward. He knows what the Supreme Court said. He knows the law, its intention, its spirit, everything about it. Yet, in the election of 2006, he did what he did. It is called Fraud and he knows it.

It will be up to Elections Canada and the courts to decide what they think about his actions. Then, in an election, it will be up to Canadians to decide for themselves.

The Canada eZine - News, Entertainment and Politics for Canadians ...

says he still intends to scrap the gun registry. Welcome to the Canada eZine. This is a subsection of the Lilith eZine where only ... HarperCanada Vs. Asia ...

Canadian News of 2007: From Terrorism to Tasers - The Canada eZine

Canadian News of 2007 The Canada eZine - Newsmakers ... newspaper baron Conrad Black who came second with 27 and Prime Minister Stephen Harper with 15. ...

Harper Flip Flops on Same Sex Marriages

Prime Minister Stephen Harper stands in the House of Commons today (Dec. 7, 2007) to vote in favour of a motion to re-examine Canada's same-sex marriage law ...

Canadian Tax Reform - The Canada eZine

Canadian Tax Reform The Canada eZine - Taxes & Politics ... I also told Stephen Harper how to reform Canada's taxes, starting with reducing the GST from 7% ...

Stephen Harper Vs Kyoto and the Environment

30 Jan 2007 ... Click here to browse the Lilith eZine. ... Harper is being ridiculous. If Canada does not meet the Kyoto levels of emissions they can simply ...

Canada's Worker Shortages - The Canada eZine

Canada's Worker Shortages The Canada eZine - Economics & Education ... The Harper...
government says we needn't worry because we are shifting away from ...  

The Canadian Dollar and Exports - The Canada eZine

The Canadian Dollar & Exports The Canada eZine - Economics ... business following a recent meeting between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Dalai Lama ...

Comment (1)

April 2008
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      
prev   next

  • All Blogs
  • Messenger
  • Member Search
  • Who's Online
    WebRing Bloggers: 9271

    Members: 0
    Guests: 0

    Today: 3

  • Archives
    Recent Posts
    Jan 2018
    Nov 2016
    Aug 2016
    Nov 2014
    Dec 2013
    Aug 2013
    Jun 2013
    May 2013
    Mar 2013
    Jan 2013
    Dec 2012
    Oct 2012
    Sep 2012
    Aug 2012
    Jul 2012
    May 2012
    Mar 2012
    Feb 2012
    Dec 2011
    Oct 2011
    Sep 2011
    Aug 2011
    Jul 2011
    Jun 2011
    May 2011
    Apr 2011
    Mar 2011
    Feb 2011
    Nov 2010
    Oct 2010
    Sep 2010
    Aug 2010
    Jul 2010
    Jun 2010
    May 2010
    Apr 2010
    Mar 2010
    Feb 2010
    Jan 2010
    Dec 2009
    Oct 2009
    Sep 2009
    Aug 2009
    May 2009
    Apr 2009
    Mar 2009
    Feb 2009
    Jan 2009
    Dec 2008
    Nov 2008
    Oct 2008
    Sep 2008
    Aug 2008
    Jul 2008
    Jun 2008
    May 2008
    Mar 2008
    Feb 2008
    Jan 2008
    Dec 2007
    Nov 2007
    Jun 2007

    What's New | Popular | Auctions | Blogs | Webspace | Discuss | ShopDragon | Newsletter | Powered by R360 | Contact Us
    Copyright © 2001-2012 WebRing®, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Service - Help - Privacy Policy