Saturday, March 22, 2014

Something For Stephanie



In yesterday's post entitled The Warnings Are Everywhere, I wrote about how Canada is being critically scrutinized both domestically and internationally for the anti-democratic measures contained in the 'Fair' Elections Act. I drew heavily upon an open letter sent by an array of professors from countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark and Ireland.

Stephanie left the following message:

I'd really like to read the open letter by international experts, but unfortunately, it's behind the Globe and Mail pay wall. I should not have to pay for the Globe to read this open letter, intended for me, a Canadian citizen. Any other links to it? Please?

Since I could not find any other source for the letter, and since Stephanie makes an excellent point that an open letter intended for Canadian citizens should not be restricted to those willing to go behind the Globe and Mail's paywall, I offer the letter here:

We, the undersigned, international scholars and political scientists, are concerned that Canada’s international reputation as one of the world’s guardians of democracy and human rights is threatened by passage of the proposed Fair Elections Act.

We believe that this Act would prove [to] be deeply damaging for electoral integrity within Canada, as well as providing an example which, if emulated elsewhere, may potentially harm international standards of electoral rights around the world.

In particular, the governing party in Canada has proposed a set of wide-ranging changes, which if enacted, would, we believe, undermine the integrity of the Canadian electoral process, diminish the effectiveness of Elections Canada, reduce voting rights, expand the role of money in politics, and foster partisan bias in election administration.

The bill seeks to rewrite many major laws and regulations governing elections in Canada. These major changes would reduce electoral integrity, as follows:

Elections Canada: The proposed Act significantly diminishes the effectiveness of Elections Canada, a non-partisan agency, in the fair administration of elections and the investigation of electoral infractions by:

· Severely limiting the ability of the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) to communicate with the public, thereby preventing the CEO from encouraging voting and civic participation, and publishing research reports

· Removing the enforcement arm of the agency, the Commissioner of Elections, from Elections Canada, and placing it in the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), a government department

· Prohibiting the Commissioner from communicating with the public about the details of any investigation

· Preventing any details about the Commissioner’s investigations from being included in the DPP’s annual report on the Commissioner’s activities – a report that the DPP provides to the Attorney General (AG), and which the AG forwards to Parliament

· Failing to provide the Commissioner with the power to compel witness testimony (a significant obstacle in a recent investigation of electoral fraud)

Right to Vote: The proposed Act diminishes the ability of citizens to vote in elections by:

· Prohibiting the use of vouching to establish a citizen’s eligibility to vote

· Prohibiting the use of Voter Information Cards to establish a citizen’s identity or residency

The prohibition against vouching is ostensibly to reduce voter fraud yet there is no evidence, as affirmed by the Neufeld Report on Compliance Review, that vouching results in voter fraud. These changes to the voter eligibility rules will disproportionately impact seniors, students, the economically disadvantaged, and First Nations citizens, leading to an estimated disenfranchisement of over 120,000 citizens.

Money in Politics: The proposed Act expands the role of money in elections by:

· Exempting “fundraising expenses” from the spending limits for political parties, thereby creating a potential loophole and weakening enforcement

· Failing to require political parties to provide supporting documentation for their expenses, even though the parties are reimbursed over $30 million after every election

· Increasing the caps on individual donations from $1200 to $1500 per calendar year

· Increasing the caps on candidates’ contributions to their own campaigns from $1200 to $5000 per election for candidates and $25,000 per election for leadership contestants

· Creating a gap between the allowable campaign contributions of ordinary citizens and the contributions of candidates to their own campaigns, and thus increasing the influence of personal wealth in elections

Partisan Bias: The proposed Act fosters partisan bias and politicization by:

· Enabling the winning political party to recommend names for poll supervisors, thereby politicizing the electoral process and introducing the possibility of partisan bias

· By exempting “fundraising expenses” (communications with electors who have previously donated over $20 to a party) from “campaign spending,” creating a bias in favour of parties with longer lists of donors above this threshold – currently, the governing party

The substance of the Fair Elections Act raises significant concerns with respect to the future of electoral integrity in Canada. The process by which the proposed Act is being rushed into law in Parliament has also sparked considerable concern. The governing political party has used its majority power to cut off debate and discussion in an effort to enact the bill as soon as possible. By contrast, the conventional approach to reforming the electoral apparatus in Canada has always involved widespread consultation with Elections Canada, the opposition parties and the citizens at large, as well as with the international community.

In conclusion, we, the undersigned, ask that the proposed legislation should be revised so that contests in Canada continue to meet the highest international standards of electoral integrity.

Yours sincerely,


Professor Shaun Bowler, University of California, Riverside, US

Professor Brian Costar, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia

Professor Ivor Crewe, University College, Oxford, UK

Professor Jorgen Elklit, Aarhus University, Denmark

Professor David Farrell, University College, Dublin, Ireland

Professor Andrew Geddis, University of Otago, New Zealand

Professor Lisa Hill, University of Adelaide, Australia

Professor Ronald Inglehart, University of Michigan, US

Professor Judith Kelley, Duke University, US

Professor Alexander Keyssar, Harvard University, US

Dr. Ron Levy, Australian National University, Australia

Professor Richard Matland, University of Illinois, US

Professor Dan Meagher, Deakin University, Australia

Dr. Jenni Newton-Farrelly, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia

Professor Pippa Norris, Harvard and Sydney Universities, US/Australia

Professor Graeme Orr, University of Queensland, Australia

Professor Andrew Reynolds, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, US

Professor Ken Sherrill, Hunter College, City University of New York, US

Professor Daniel Tokaji, The Ohio State University, US

12 comments:

  1. .. Thank You .. ! Re the Open Letter !

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for posting this Lorne. I know there are technical workarounds, but I refuse to venture behind mainstream pay walls. There usually isn't much worth reading there anyhow.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Appreciate your posting of this letter, one that all Canadians should read.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I had never realized how close to a fascist state this Party is moving Canada. Suspending parliament, Hiding major legislation in omnibus bills and robo-calls aren't enough. Now they cripple the system from blocking their moves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have truly never been more pessimistic about the future of Canada, James, as I have been since the Harper regime gained office. It really is incumbent upon all of us to do our best to see that a different party leads the country after the next election.

      Delete
  5. Thanks from me, also, for posting this letter. It's time for all Canadians to realize the threat to true democracy that Harper and Conservatives are. We need to stand up tall and shout out loudly that our answer to this legislation is "NO!"--and then remove this offensive group from power in 2015 elecrion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My pleasure, Fred. I am concerned that outside the piece in the Globe and the coverage on Power and Politics, this story has not had wider exposure.

      Delete
  6. First of all I would like to say that I am sick and tired of politicians being able say and get away with saying whatever they feel it takes to get elected, do nothing about what they promised as part of their election platform and then when elected, be provided with gold plated benefits and protection from any early removal (prior to the next election) when their behavior and failings become obvious to the electorate. It's as if they have no duty or responsibility to do as they said they would do. Secondly, I'm sick and tired of special interest groups, essential service groups and so many other groups, many privileged, constantly screaming out for rights and privileges to be provided at the tax payers expense...all as if the source for such of funds comes from a
    bottomless pit.

    To the subject of the proposed Fair Elections Act and the open letter. In line with my thoughts above, my first reaction is "here we go again". I question why all those supposedly deep thinking undersigned profs each put their name to a document that is all so one sided. Not one mention is made of any electorate duty or responsibility. Since the life of all citizens is impacted by those they elect into office, should they not therefore be legally obligated to cast a vote.

    The way things are going I can see us once again ending up with document that just like the 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights and the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights, is all one sided. In the case of the latter, the provision of a whole bunch of rights and freedoms and all provided without any need for any duty or responsibility on the part of the recipient !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While I appreciate the frustration you express here, Anon, allow me to address one of your points: the responsibilities and obligations of the electorate. Believe me, I think about that issue a great deal, and my quest is always to try to spread the word about what is happening with the elected government. Your observation about how quickly politicians, once elected, frequently forget the promises they made during the campaign is, I believe, made easier by the belief that most are not engaged politically, many do not vote, and few of the public are willing to take them to account. That seems to be a heavy price to pay for having the freedom not to vote.

      However, i remain far from convinced that compulsory voting is one of the answers.My opposition is largely a philosophical one. Is a forced voted, compared to an informed one, of any use? If people are made to vote, they might, out of simple resentment, perhaps check off the first name on the ballot, or simply spoil the ballot. I don't believe that would lead to increased political accountability.

      My preference is to try to inform people, educate them to the point where they are motivated to go to the polls. One of the most insidious aspects of the Fair Elections Act is that it would prevent Elections Canada from carrying out any outreach/educational programs that might lead to increased participation.

      So, the key, in my view, is to get people angry enough to vote in the next election as they realize how the current government is destroying our traditions and values.

      Delete