Evidence of meeting #44 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
I want to thank you for a comprehensive and very helpful presentation to the committee.
There have been some discussions, and the members have agreed that we will have a 10-minute first round and all subsequent rounds will be five minutes.
I have the list, and we will begin with Mr. LeBlanc, followed by Madame Lavallée, then the NDP, and then the Conservatives.
Mr. LeBlanc, s'il vous plaît.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for your presentation Mr. Mayrand. I also want to thank you and the members of Elections Canada's staff for your work, which we consider remarkable. Over the years, we have all had the experience of cooperating with your office and auditors. For my part, I must tell you that you have shown outstanding professionalism, and I thank you for that.
I have a few quite specific questions, particularly concerning the second part of your presentation. In the discussions concerning the 67 returns that were referred, or that you considered posed a problem, a number of people said that the content of the advertisements was a problem. They said, for example, that the campaigns of the 67 ridings could contain advertising from the leader of the political party.
Am I right in thinking that the content as such had nothing to do with your decision to refer those files to the Commissioner?
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Advertising content is not one of the five factors that led to my decision. Candidates are free to choose the best way to promote their campaigns and to secure the support of electors. Elections Canada does not intervene with regard to advertisement content.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you very much.
A lot of people have alleged that all political parties do the same thing. I found your explanation at the outset concerning transfers very useful because, if I understood correctly, the issue is not the transfers as such. The issue is the ultimate purpose of the transfer. What was done with the money transferred becomes the important question.
Am I right in thinking that the idea—the table that you presented was very well done—of transferring between the party, between riding associations and the candidate, is not what led you to refer the files to the Commissioner?
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
No. Indeed, as regards the transfers, as mentioned earlier, the act provides that resources may be transferred or moved between the entities of a single family. What the act does not allow, however, is the transfer of expenses. So you can transfer monies, assets, goods or services, but not an expense. The expense must have been incurred by the person who claims it.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
So if I understood your presentation correctly, the concern you had in the 67 cases was that the expenses contained in the returns had not been incurred for the local campaigns, but were instead expenses that should have been attributed to the national party.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
The only decision I made was that I was not convinced that the expenses as filed had been incurred by those who claimed them, that is to say the candidates. I have made no decision to date concerning the allocation of those expenses.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
That's a good point. If, in your judgment, the 67 Conservative returns did not satisfy you that those expenses were incurred by the candidates who claimed reimbursement, would you not agree that advertising expenses—because that's what they were in those cases—need to be attributed to someone? In an election period, you cannot advertise for a political purpose and not have that advertising expense be assumed by a candidate, the national party, or a third party, if done according to the law. It can't just hang out there as an expense that we can ignore and not refund.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
As I mentioned in my presentation, there are decisions left to be made on this matter. One of them has to do with the attribution of the expense. I have not made that decision yet.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Mr. Mayrand.
With respect to the idea that every political party engaged in these in-and-out transfers, if you decided to refer only 67 Conservative returns, that would presumably be because your audit uncovered nothing to lead you to believe that other political parties in the last general election participated in any of these transfers.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Again, there were transfers on the part of all parties.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
I am referring to the transfers you judged not to have been incurred by the local candidate.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
I agree that there were transfers. We've gone over that, and you're absolutely right, but the 67 Conservative returns contained transfers that raised concerns about whether they were incurred by the candidates claiming reimbursement. This was not the case with the other political party returns that you audited.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
As I mentioned in my presentation, we looked at all the returns for the 38th and 39th general elections. We have not seen any group of transactions that conforms to all the factors I mentioned in my presentation.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Monsieur Mayrand.
There has also been a lot of confusion about the case the Conservative Party began in the Federal Court—the judicial review application that was brought by the Conservative Party. My understanding is that the decision to deny the reimbursements and to refer those files to the commissioner predated the beginning of the lawsuit in Federal Court. Is that accurate?
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
So it is not accurate to say that your decision to refer these Conservative returns to the commissioner for investigation had something to do with a lawsuit the Conservative Party began.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
The referral had taken place before.
This may be seen as a technical point, but with regard to the notion of distinguishing between political entities, the procedure before the Federal Court is on behalf of two official agents. There are two agents seeking a review.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Right. The original statement of claim included many more plaintiffs; in fact, it was amended to only add two. The original group was--
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
My point is that the court proceedings had been launched by agents of candidates, not necessarily the party.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
That's a valid point.
Mr. Mayrand, we were informed by a number of Conservative Party spokespersons that the rules were changed along the way and that Elections Canada had a document that provided advice to official agents, for example, that was altered in the middle of the campaign, or afterwards. So the interpretation of certain official agents, let's say of the Conservative Party, was made based on that document published by Elections Canada.
Is it fair to say that somehow Elections Canada, as the Conservatives have alleged, changed the rules in midstream, and therefore the mistake that these 67 official agents may have made occurred somehow because they relied on a document that Elections Canada had distributed? Is that a fair comment?
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I need to point out that Elections Canada doesn't set the rules. It acts as a referee, but the rules are set by the legislation. That's the first point.
As I mentioned in my presentation, we do produce all sorts of documents and manuals to assist candidates and agents in meeting their obligations and responsibilities under the act. We review those manuals regularly, especially after any general election, drawing in essence from what happened from the previous election. It was in January 2007, I believe, that some changes were made to the manual, but again, those changes occurred after the election, and those changes, if they were to have changed any practice substantially, would apply only on a forward basis. Elections Canada would never seek to implement retroactively an interpretation that has been well known and used by participants.