Evidence of meeting #106 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I can't remember who asked the question, but earlier you were talking about the third party regime and that Elections Canada has the power to audit the contributions that were received pre-writ. That's my terminology, of course. What would trigger an audit of those contributions? I guess you audit spending in the pre-writ period as well. How would that be triggered? What would be the barrier such that Elections Canada would say, “Gee, we'd better look into this”?
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
It's difficult to be in Elections Canada's shoes. I know you're going to speak with the acting CEO soon, but one might be a suspicion regarding the problem that you outlined, foreign money finding its way into partisan purposes.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
What I'm wondering is what would arouse that suspicion? What would be a trigger? When legislation talks about there being an ability to audit but there's not really anything that triggers an audit, one wonders whether it would ever happen and, therefore, whether this would be an easy loophole to jump through. Can you imagine for me what might arouse suspicion sufficiently that there would be a need to do an audit? The other question is whether a large part of that could be that a public complaint could be brought that would arrive at one.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
A dramatic change in behaviour of a third party might be reason to arouse the suspicions of someone and make it reasonable to demand the audit trail or the receipts.
Senior Policy Advisor, Privy Council Office
I would add that the reports of the third parties will also be posted on Elections Canada's website at some point. There is a possibility that if someone sees something that they consider suspicious, they could bring forward a complaint through the commissioner.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
So it is possible for a member of the public to say, “Gee, something seems funny here. I'd like to see Elections Canada look into this,” and they can make a complaint, and Elections Canada would be able to determine whether it was worth it to investigate. Does the legislation allow that?
Senior Policy Advisor, Privy Council Office
The complaint would go to the commissioner.
Conservative
Senior Policy Advisor, Privy Council Office
The commissioner would decide whether or not to investigate.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Yes, and one of the provisions in Bill C-76 is the commissioner's ability to initiate an investigation.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
You mentioned the public, so if a member of the public says, “Gee, something seems funny. This third party all of a sudden sure seems to have a lot more influence than it did before, and I wonder where all the money is coming from” and they make a complaint to the commissioner, does the legislation as it's written now authorize an investigation and an audit to take place as a result of that?
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
It's not automatic. I don't want to leave you with the impression that someone would make a complaint and then the commissioner would have to launch to investigation. It's not—
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I get that there's a difference between a complaint being received and there being a requirement that there be an audit. I would almost argue that maybe that should be something. However, that being said, based on that complaint, they would be authorized to determine whether—
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
If they have reason to believe that there's an issue, yes.
Conservative
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
That's correct.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Thank you.
I have two quick clarification questions and then a different question. With respect to the expat declaration, that declaration, I take it, is sworn in front of a commissioner, or what does that declaration look like? Does it have to be sworn?
LCdr Jean-François Morin
It is signed by the elector. I would have to verify in the legislation. I can get back to you right after.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
The question came up with respect to what counts as advertising with a third party. Let's say, for example, you have an organization that endorses the platform of a party specifically and references the platform but isn't necessarily endorsing the party. Is that included as advertising?
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Can we accept that “platform” might be an important policy, so “x” is really important?
In that case, they've declared that a certain policy is important.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
That is not partisan advertising. That's merely a declaration that this issue is important. It's issue advertising. It's covered in the writ period. It's not covered in the pre-writ period.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Right. But in the writ period, if you mention the policy and you mention the party that has that policy—
