Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 16th, 2006

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

What happens if he fails to meet that threshold?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

By the way, this is a new threshold from January 1, 2004. Before that, it was a year and a half for the whole shooting match. This bill would increase that to ten years--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

This bill will increase that to ten years.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

--and increase the period within which the prosecution must take place to five years. So it becomes a five and ten issue, which is much better in terms of seeking to obtain the prosecutorial purposes of the statute.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

That's interesting. So if there were a grievance stemming from the 2004 federal election, the passing of this bill may in fact make that complaint viable; if otherwise, it would be expiring soon had we not acted on it by now.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

No. The statute of limitations for anything that occurred up to the point of passage of legislation would remain up to seven years, because no law can be made retroactive in that respect.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I'm thinking of one specific example. Can you confirm or deny that you referred the matter of Belinda Stronach's $240,000 campaign expenses to the independent commissioner?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

It is not the custom to confirm or deny any referral made to the commissioner on any matter, even if reference was not made.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It isn't a matter of confidentiality because the official agent who has been dealing with--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Martin, I'm very nervous about getting into specific cases. I don't think it's appropriate for this committee to get into specific cases. I think we can talk in generalities and ask questions in generalities, but I don't want to get into specifics.

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I think Mr. Martin has the right to ask any questions that he chooses. If the witness cannot answer them for any particular reason, I think he's more than capable of telling the committee that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, I don't.

Please proceed, Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I will keep a lid on it, Mr. Chairman. I'm only asking because we've been increasingly frustrated with the elections commissioner, even though it says in our briefing notes that there have been no complaints, and everybody seems satisfied with the status quo and that the independent commissioner is doing all he can. A lot of us are starting to feel that there's one set of election rules for the rich and one for the poor—or the rest of us, at least—because we were always told that if we overspent our election financing by $10, we would not only lose our seat but also not be allowed to run again for x number of years. There are drastic consequences, yet we have a well-publicized, graphic illustration of overspending by a factor of three times the spending limits, and they're willing to take the word of Magna, who was the official agent, that the $75,000 for the party was indeed for the party, because they had to do a lot of “wiring”.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Martin, you're going there again. Please restrain yourself.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Okay, I will. I'm only asking.... I suppose the context is the retroactivity of that particular case. It would worry me greatly if we were to lose our opportunity to prosecute Belinda Stronach for exceeding the spending limits.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You know, we're going to have to move on. You're ignoring what I'm saying: I don't want to talk about specific cases at this particular—

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It isn't up to you, Chair, with all due respect.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, until someone challenges me, that's the ruling I'm making.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Well, we have the Chief Electoral Officer here. This is our opportunity to talk about matters within his office.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Please proceed, Mr. Martin, and keep in mind what I said.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I will, in fact.

It strikes me that we're enforcing religiously, or with great vigour, the rules on those of us who are trying to stay within the spending limits, but that it's really up to the official agent. It seems to be on an honour system. If the official agent says this $75,000 bill for this one victory party was limited to election night after the polls closed, that's okay with the independent commissioner.

Would that be in keeping with the rules as you see them?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Mr. Chairman, I wish to assure the committee and I wish to assure Parliament that the rules are enforced equally for everyone, whether they're MPs, rich, poor, in-between, or just candidates who didn't make it to the House. The rulings are all consistent. Whether they're made by the commissioner in his interpretation of the statute or by the officials who review these things—and one is not the same as the other—I want to assure Mr. Martin and to assure all Canadians, because we're on TV, that there is no favouritism of any kind demonstrated in the administration of the Canada Elections Act.

I can understand the concern, but I want to make that very clear.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

But when the official agent in this case has spent.... He said himself that he had spent the last year dealing with audits and with filing people from Elections Canada investigating the extraordinary file.... And I have copies of two binders full of all the receipts from that particular campaign.

I still find it shocking that it takes that long to apply the rules to that individual, when I've been told that if I overspent by $10, I would lose my seat, or that something swift—a lightning bolt—would come down from Elections Canada and be the end of me as an MP. But others seem to be able to drag this out.

So the director of prosecutions will now, I suppose, have better prosecutorial—

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Martin. Your time is up, and we have a point of order.

Ms. Jennings.