Evidence of meeting #18 for Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was public.
9 a.m.
Liberal
Stephen Owen Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Gardner, I was very interested to hear your description of the situation in Quebec, where returning officers are appointed through a competition process at the local level. Who convenes that and presides over that competition, and how is it guarded against becoming a political exercise or a partisan exercise?
9 a.m.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
I believe that, from the moment this was implemented, the situation improved a thousand fold compared to what had previously existed. The incompetence of a large number of returning officers was apparent, known to everyone and even to all the political parties.
In Quebec, regulations were passed by the National Assembly Committee requiring the Chief Electoral Officer to table his regulations and have them passed. Those regulations expressly state the qualifications sought for returning officers and for the public competition process. They include the procedure and the individuals who are empowered to evaluate the various applications. They also provide guidelines for applications for candidates.
For example, a former member is required to wait two years before applying for a returning officer position. He first has to serve out a waiting period. A number of criteria are stated in the regulations, which, I think, ensure that appointments are made on merit—as Mr. Kingsley said—and in a very specific manner, through a process that is known, public, mandatory and therefore also helps to re-establish the relationship of trust between electors and the electoral system.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Excuse me, I don't know whether the others have any comments--Mr. Donison, Mr. MacKinnon, Mr. Hébert...?
Sorry, Mr. Owen.
9:05 a.m.
Executive Director, Conservative Party of Canada
My only comment is that Elections Canada is a very competent agency of the Parliament of Canada, and I think I would leave it in the capable hands of Mr. Kingsley and his staff. They have a very rigorous recruitment process at Elections Canada now, and I'm sure that's what he will apply when he's given the authority to appoint the returning officers.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Stephen Owen Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
The only additional question I have is, who actually appoints the person after the competition in Quebec? Is it the chief electoral officer of Quebec? Who makes the final decision?
9:05 a.m.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
The Chief Electoral Officer has responsibility for the composition of the selection committee, but he has an obligation to hold a public competition. That's not left to his discretion. The act currently states simply that he must make the appointments on the basis of merit. There is no obligation to hold public competitions, and we believe that it is the legislators' responsibility to include this obligation to hold public competitions in the act in order to set guidelines for the actions of the Chief Electoral Officer.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
We have a little bit of time left.
Mr. Sauvageau, do you have any questions?
Mr. Martin, very briefly.
9:05 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I would like to go a little further with this idea about loans. A lot of us feel Bill C-24 was put in place in the recognition that big money bastardizes democracy, that certain individuals have a disproportionate amount of influence over the democratic process because they can buy elections.
Having said that--would you agree then with Mr. Hébert's comments?--the current status quo is that after 18 months, if these loans aren't repaid they revert to being a donation. This means that person who loaned $100,000, 18 months later would have been allowed to donate $100,000.
What's the difference there? Is that incorrect? I stand to be corrected. If that's the case, it needs to be remedied. What is your opinion? What happens to that loan?
9:05 a.m.
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada
It is incorrect that it becomes a contribution. It becomes an illegal donation. That loan must be repaid. The loan must continue to bear interest, and both the interest and the principal must be repaid with Bill C-24 eligible contributions from individuals under the limit prescribed by law.
Those loans must be repaid. It's all done very transparently. Every expense generated by that amount of money is reported. Every loan is reported. I would note that the Liberal Party went further than the Canada Elections Act required in prescribing that candidates divulge those loans upon entering and registering for the leadership race. In other words, we were not required to require the candidates to do that. We asked them to do that, and we thought it was an important level of accountability and transparency. We went over and above the law, and I do not agree with your observation at all.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Mr. Martin, I'm going to give the last minute and a half to Mr. James Moore.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Just briefly, Mr. MacKinnon, you described the process of the federal New Democratic Party raising money and then giving the money to candidates such as Mr. Martin as money laundering, but--
9:10 a.m.
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada
You described something as money laundering.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
No, that was your language, but I'm curious. On the issue of loans, as Mr. Martin describes it, this is a very interesting thing that's happening I think right now in the Liberal leadership race. I'd ask you to comment, in the spirit of this legislation, on what it means internally in the Liberal Party and how your party may comport itself.
It was reported yesterday that Mr. Brison, in his leadership race, has been loaned $200,000, and now we have the story today of 11-year-old children giving over $5,000 to Mr. Volpe's leadership campaign. What does that say about this process of loans? If you describe it as laundering for a political party to give money to candidates, but it's okay for 11-year-old children, I suppose in full consciousness of what they're doing, to give $11,000 to leadership candidates, and financial institutions to give $200,000 to Mr. Brison, and they then have to cut a cheque for $50,000 to the Liberal Party, how would you describe that?
9:10 a.m.
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada
There are so many inaccuracies in that statement I don't know where to begin. However, the loans of leadership candidates are reported. The only reason we're talking about them is that we required candidates to report those loans. They--
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
But is it proper for children to give money?
9:10 a.m.
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada
Those loans are reported. They bear interest. They must be repaid. And it is a criminal offence if they are not repaid. That is what the law says. We are here talking about those loans precisely because I ordered those loans be disclosed and that leadership candidates disclose those loans.
You misconstrue everything that I said about what Mr. Martin.... Mr. Martin is here talking to me about egg-sucking dogs, and I'm here saying that we don't know, in the year 2000, who gave to his leadership campaign because all of the donors were laundered, yes, through the New Democratic Party, and he lists only the New Democratic Party as a donor to his election campaign in 2000. In 2004, he spent--as I think we've come to expect of the NDP--more than he raised.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
9:10 a.m.
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada
It's important I think that we--
9:10 a.m.
An hon. member
[Inaudible--Editor]