Debates of March 8th, 2012

Dean Del Mastro Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I agree that when one slips on a banana peel one is dirty. The NDP slipped on a banana peel when it tried to illegally direct money into the Broadbent Institute just this past fall. It had to return cheques as a result of Elections Canada looking into the matter. Very clearly, it knew it was making infractions against the Canada Elections Act.

Members of the NDP also robodialed a Quebec member's riding some months ago without identifying themselves, which is against the law according to the CRTC. They might want to look into that. They also have robodialed my riding and the ridings of other Conservative members very recently making phoney allegations about the intent of legislation. These efforts are ongoing on the part of the NDP members. They are not lily white. In fact, we stand accused by parties that undertake the exact actions that they pretend to dislike.

Charmaine Borg Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Compton—Stanstead.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to rise today to share my thoughts on an important issue that goes to the heart of the legitimacy of this House, democracy.

Old habits seem to die hard with the Conservatives. One year later, almost to the day, another scandal on electoral fraud has broken out. I am starting to have serious misgivings about the democracy in which we live.

It discourages me when I see the extent to which this electoral fraud seems to be par for the course for this government. Over recent years, this government has tried an increasing number of strategies that push the limits as to what is acceptable and what is unacceptable in Canadian politics. The government was found guilty only last year of electoral fraud during the 2005–2006 election. This five year dispute, categorized as “administrative” by the Prime Minister himself, smacks of growing contempt by this government towards Canada's democratic institutions.

This perception has been reinforced by the behaviour of this Prime Minister during last year's debacle. As reported by numerous university professors, who were signatories to an op-ed published in La Presse on April 25 of last year, and I quote:

His most virulent attacks were reserved for the judges that he described more than once as “activists” who meddle in politics. In saying this, it is in fact he [the Prime Minister] who was politicizing the administration of justice. This is a dangerous and slippery slope at the bottom of which it is not judges who have the most to lose. [...] When the time has come that judges have to fear the criticism, and even the reprisals of political leaders, the rights of everyday citizens will hold hardly more weight than those of the state. Never before have our leaders dared to venture in this direction.

A press review by Manon Cornellier published in Le Devoir on March 3 demonstrates the furor with which Canadians are reacting to this new scandal.

Canadians are fed up, frustrated and indignant. Their confidence in the electoral system has been even further shaken. Who can blame them when increasingly scandalous revelations are being systematically disclosed? How can the government accuse the opposition parties, which are representing the real concerns of Canadians, of orchestrating a smear campaign, when we are aware of the dubious tactics employed by this government?

The general indignation felt by Canadians in all regions of this country shows the extent to which Canadians are becoming increasingly cynical about politics and about our government. I am particularly concerned by the serious consequences that this growing feeling will have for our future generations.

I am pleased to be one of the 20 or so young members of this House, because I hope that our involvement in politics will restore hope to Canadian youth. We have to let them see our commitment, and above all our integrity.

How is that possible when this government continues to act so inconsistently? It abolishes the firearms registry. It changes the census rules, citing the violation of people’s privacy, among other things, but has no hesitation about introducing a bill that is potentially dangerous to individual rights and freedoms: Bill C-30. It is completely baffling.

We must acknowledge, at all costs, that this scandal shows us that the electoral landscape is no longer the same in Canada. The age of innocence, of trust, has unfortunately come to an end. Canadians are witnessing a scandal that shows just how much some people will play with the electoral system in order to prevent people from participating in an institution that is fundamental to our rights and freedoms. This is serious, it is sad, it is disappointing and it is deplorable.

In Canada, there used to be good faith, over and above our political differences. We all agreed that respect for democracy and freedom of expression was fundamental. Clearly, that is no longer the case. The election fraud scandal shows us that there are players who will not hesitate to subvert the system in order to give voters false information and harass them.

This is not just an issue of robocalls. It would have been the same scandal if the method used had been an email or a letter. It is election fraud, which is deplorable, and the use of communication methods to misinform voters and affect their participation.

The NDP is proposing something very important in today’s motion. The NDP is proposing that we take strong action to find the guilty parties and restore Canadians’ confidence in the electoral system.

This is a bold motion whose only purpose is to give the Chief Electoral Officer additional powers so he can get to the bottom of this scandal. Canadians all across the country would think that a motion like this is essential. I am pleased to learn that the government is going to support it. However, this government has proved that it is afraid of the outcome of an investigation, afraid to discover who is responsible for the election fraud that insulted so many Canadians. Why such cowardice on the government’s part?

Losing the confidence of the electorate is the real issue here, because losing the confidence of the electorate means losing one’s own legitimacy in this House. If the people view their own electoral system—the pillar of the democratic foundation of this country—with cynicism, and observers are worried about respect for the independence of the judicial system, how can we allow machinations like these to be repeated? It is the responsibility of the government to prevent scandals like this from taking place. This is one more example in a long list of cases of mismanagement of public funds.

I thought of my constituents as I rose today. They are the ones who are the biggest victims in all this. This is an affront to the fundamental rights of people to participate, express themselves and organize in a democratic and participatory community. Thanks to their right to vote, the people of Terrebonne, Blainville and Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, just like the people of Guelph, Nipissing-Timiskaming and elsewhere, have the chance to directly influence federal politics just once every three or four years. It is a very important time for them, because an election makes them think about their collective future, their dreams and their values. Those thoughts, that discussion, that participation are sacred. Voting means having the right to think and express oneself. The five-week election campaign is when the greatest number of people get involved.

My constituents are very concerned and rightfully so. What are they going to think about the quality of our democracy from now on? How can I tell them with confidence that their fundamental right to democratic expression will be respected in future?

I want to point out that in Terrebonne, Blainville and Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines there are a number of veterans who risked their lives to give us this sacred right. There are women—and today is International Women's Day—who fought for the right to vote. In this House, unfortunately, we are in process of debating whether that right to vote was violated. I find that unbelievably sad. People were outraged when Maurice Duplessis had dead people voting for him. I wonder which is worse: doing that or preventing the living from voting.

Frank Valeriote Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, a previous speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, said that this was exclusive to Guelph and yet we know there were calls to constituents of Nipissing—Timiskaming, Kingston and the Islands, Saanich—Gulf Islands and Windsor—Tecumseh, all of the same nature. They were calls to identify voters as not supporting the Conservatives and then being followed up with a call on election day to tell people to go elsewhere than their regular poll.

Does the member think that could possibly be the concoction of one rogue person or was it a collaborative effort? Would it have required connections to the only party that would have that kind of voter identification system?

Charmaine Borg Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Guelph for his question. Thirty-one thousand people called Elections Canada. This is not a matter of just one constituency in particular. Those 31,000 calls could not all have come from Guelph or Nipissing; they came from all over. That is why this motion has been moved today. Elections Canada needs more powers to investigate this matter. We must give it those powers. I am pleased to see that the Conservatives will support this motion because we need to get to the bottom of this.

Anne Minh-Thu Quach Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague and thank her for her outstanding, comprehensive and extremely heartfelt speech. She aptly explains for us how these sorts of fraudulent and dubious tactics kill voter interest. In the end, this is a strategy that casts doubt on the very legitimacy of the members who are part of the government, since it is they who represent the voters. If the voters’ right to vote has not been respected, all of this is cast into question.

There is talk of engaging young people in the discussions so they can make their opinions known. How indeed can the involvement of young people be restored with this sort of enterprise?

Charmaine Borg Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I will tell you what must not be done: conduct a campaign of election fraud. That is the main thing not to do. If we want to inspire our youth and inspire our own generation and future generations to get involved in politics, we have to show them that their right to vote will be respected in future. To me, that is paramount. If we want to encourage public consultations and discussions, it starts with the right to vote. I would like to thank my colleague. I think that what we have here is a perfect example of what not to do.

Chris Alexander Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Terrebonne—Blainville has just spoken the words “election fraud”. If we had no proof that the party opposite is in the process of conducting a smear campaign, we have it now. Nothing has in fact been proven. The Elections Canada investigations have not been completed and she is already talking election fraud.

Her predecessor, another opposition member, lamented the voter turnout rate in Canada compared with the rate in the 1950s. Happily, the turnout rate was up in the last election. Does the hon. member not agree that to talk about election fraud at this time, with no evidence and no proof, would tend to discourage voters in a completely gratuitous and unnecessary way, and that she is complicit in this unjustified and truly deplorable smear campaign?

Charmaine Borg Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, we saw an instance of election fraud just last year. It is not unusual to talk about it. It was in fact proven, and the Conservatives even pleaded guilty to the charge.

This is not the first time that election fraud has been raised in the House. Thirty-one thousand calls represent a real campaign. Is he saying that 31,000 Canadians are involved in a smear campaign? I think that those Canadians, who were denied the right to vote because they were misinformed as to the site of their polling station, will be insulted that the hon. colleague opposite is saying they are part of a smear campaign. I think they will be truly insulted.

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague's comments were very passionate and he provided a good overview of this unfolding situation of alleged voter fraud and the calls that took place. I agree with everything he said, particularly the fact that the NDP has been very proactive on this issue and has brought it to the floor of the House of Commons.

I attended a big rally in Vancouver last Saturday. Hundreds of people came out, on two or three days notice, because they were so incensed and upset about the alleged election fraud, the calls that had taken place and the people who had been misdirected. We heard the Conservative government try to frame this as somehow isolated incidents or one person being fired. However, I can tell the member, and I am sure he knows, that there were 31,000 calls to Elections Canada alone.

I think people know this was quite systematic. Could the member respond to that? We are not dealing with isolated incidents; we are dealing with a systematic attempt in terms of what happened in the election.

Jean Rousseau Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her excellent question.

Setting up a system for the type of calls that were made during the last election does not happen overnight. It takes more than two or three volunteers to put the pieces together and set up a system to harass voters and flood them with all kinds of calls, especially misleading calls. Putting all of those pieces together takes structure, a system set up by people who know what they are doing and are well aware of the consequences of their actions, actions that affect the outcome of an election.

Frank Valeriote Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, so far over the course of these discussions in the last week or so we have heard the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary give three explanations for the misdirected calls on election day.

First, he said that the opposition parties did it to themselves, trying to suppress their own vote. The second explanation was that it was Elections Canada making calls. Of course we know Elections Canada does not make calls. Third, he said that a party might have done it accidentally, trying to correct the information because polling stations had changed, which is in and of itself against the Elections Canada Act. Any information given about a change in a poll is for internal purposes only. Members are not to call people and tell them this.

Could the member comment on the responses the parliamentary secretary has given to us and the excuses he has used?

Jean Rousseau Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government is playing at smoke and mirrors. It is trying to distract voters and people. When honest people who have lost faith in our electoral system hear that, they think that the system does not work. They wonder if there is any point, and they decide that they will not bother to vote because it is pointless and nothing ever happens.

The NDP is not okay with that. We will stand up, we will do politics differently in order to change things. That is why we are here, and that is why we will support the member for Hamilton Centre's motion.

The government is running around like a dog chasing its tail. I have always had a sense of humour. There is nothing logical about what is going on. The government is trying to distract and confuse people.

Judy Sgro York West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I think I am glad to join this debate. It is an unfortunate one, but it is here and we will have to get to the bottom of it. Whether we like some of what is being tossed around or whatever, it will have to be done. It did not come as a result of anything that Liberals did, that is for sure.

I am fortunate to have an opportunity to speak today. I am splitting my time with my great colleague from Guelph. Whoever was behind trying to prevent him from coming back here, I am so glad that person lost. We have a great member and we want to keep him here.

This morning, when I opened my newspaper, I was surprised and pleased to read that the government had finally reversed itself on an important issue of national electoral accountability. The headline optimistically spoke to the government's impending flip-flop on the issue of giving Elections Canada the investigative power for which it had clearly asked.

Despite this projection and my optimism that maybe this issue was going to finally be dealt with in a more positive way, the Prime Minister earlier today signalled he was preparing for yet another about face on something that was very important to Canadians. After stonewalling for weeks, the government has finally, but reluctantly, bowed to public pressure, maybe. We will see what happens over the weekend.

Members can understand the confusion about the Cons position. Just a couple of days ago, the Prime Minister stood in the House and attempted to convince Canadians, as he did with the in and out, that he was the only member who had heard nothing about Elections Canada's request for important new powers. That shocking and unbelievable statement was made following the coordinated and shameful actions of government MPs to block new and important audit powers for the Chief Electoral Officer. What could they possibly be afraid of if they are all so innocent?

What is the government's position at 4:25 p.m. on Thursday afternoon? Perhaps the government should just come clean and be honest about a few things. Media spending in the 2006 election, voter suppression in the 2011 election and its position on the matter of giving Elections Canada the power to sort this out quickly and decisively so we do not continue some of the rants that have gone on in the House today and other days.

The robocall and the voter suppression tactics used in the last election seemed to emanate from somewhere within the governing party. We are not entirely certain of all of the details, but rather than helping to dispel these concerns, the government has adopted a strategy, similar to what it has done before on the in and out and others, and that is deny, deny, distract and disguise. That is the game plan.

If only the government would stop stonewalling and start co-operating with those seeking to sort this out, this would not have to continue in the manner that it has today. The deny, deny, distract and disguise strategy, as the Conservatives clam up, has been a bit of a moving target, with answers changing continually to every question they are asked.

Let us talk about what we actually do know. When the government was faced with accusations in Guelph, the government fired a junior staffer, claiming that the 23 year old was a lone, partisan mastermind. He must be a brilliant individual to have done all of that. Then it moved to block the efforts of Elections Canada to compel documentation, and later claimed to know nothing about it. Then, as a distraction, again, it falsely claimed that the Liberal Party paid American firms to suppress our voters. Now that takes the cake for one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard in the almost 13 years I have been in the House.

This absurdity is compounded by the actual fact that earlier this month, five years after the last campaign ended, the Conservatives finally admitted to coordinated and intentional wrongdoing in the 2006 election with their in and out. As a result of its inappropriate actions, the Conservative Party will be forced to repay taxpayers $230,198. Those are facts. We are not inventing it. We are not saying it. They are on the record, and it has just come out. The government is not appealing it. We all remember how Conservatives stood in the House and did the exact same thing, saying it was not true. They denied, distracted and disguised unlawful actions in another way.

It was not until the RCMP and Elections Canada executed a search warrant and raided Conservative Party headquarters that the truth started to leak out on that issue. I find it unbelievable that they would have to do that to a major political party in our country.

In the 2006 election the Conservative Party exceeded its spending limits by over $1.3 million. This illegal activity funnelled money from local campaigns to the national Conservative campaign to sidestep the rules as if to say, “Let's not break them too much. We'll just go around them”, so that no one would catch them. This coordinated and intentional scheme allowed the Conservatives to collect Elections Canada rebates that they did not deserve. Members will remember that we get money for every vote we get.

In November, in a related case before the criminal courts in Ontario, top Conservative officials pleaded guilty to four charges that they had knowingly violated the Canada Elections Act during the 2006 election. They were not members of the NDP or the Liberals, but four Conservatives who pleaded guilty. They were forced to pay the maximum fine possible under the Canada Elections Act. I guess they had not learned enough at that time.

These past actions have been verified by the courts, so forgive me if I have trouble accepting the new Conservative lines.

It is clear that voter suppression techniques were used in the 2011 election, as demonstrated by the firing of a Conservative staffer. So far, more than 30,000 Canadians have contacted Elections Canada with their concerns about the 2011 election.

Where does that leave us today? We have to get to the bottom of this clear affront to our most basic democratic right, the right to vote. This is critically important and something that all Canadians, all of us in the House and throughout Canada, value. People have lost their lives to provide us that right. Therefore, we should not sit back and allow votes to be completely skewed by election tactics.

The governing party has been convicted of illegal electioneering in the past, so it must co-operate with authorities in a way that will reassure Canadians that democracy is alive and well in our precious country. Elections Canada must be given the powers and resources it needs to get to the bottom of this scandal. We cannot wait five years as we did with the in and out scheme so the Conservatives can break more laws.

I suggest an alternative strategy for the Cons. If they are innocent, they should just co-operate. If they are guilty, they should come clean with Canadians.

What is on the table today? Elections Canada wants and needs the power to force political parties to verify their election expenses with detailed records and receipts. This is a very simple power that will help improve accountability for past as well as future elections. It is also a requirement already imposed on private Canadians for tax purposes. Why should the Conservatives or anyone else not have to prove their expenses before getting refund from taxpayers?

The question is this. Why is the government fighting this? If it has nothing to hide, let us put this behind us, move on and give Elections Canada the tools and resources it needs.

There is saying, “The truth shall set you free”. I know the Prime Minister's personal fondness for songs by the Beatles. During his last public medley, he serenaded the crowd by telling them “he gets by with a little help from his friends”. I would hope he might also take note of another appropriate John Lennon song titled Gimme Some Truth. In case he does not know the lyric, it simply goes like this, “All I want is the truth, Just gimme some truth”.