Evidence of meeting #112 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 third.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
9:05 p.m.
Liberal
9:05 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
I lost the thread of all that, but I will point out with respect to the matter of free-time election advertising broadcasts, if you check with the Chief Electoral Officer I think you will find that it's not exactly as he described but rather that there is a provision for free-time political advertising for all political parties. It's a finite amount and it could be broadcast at any time of the day. It could be three o'clock in the morning.
9:05 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
You can have a chat with the Chief Electoral Officer and examine it.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
I was asking about third parties and the way third parties spend money. A number of third parties, each third party, non-political parties are not candidates for elections but....
9:10 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
Quite. There are provisions within the Canada Elections Act by which third party spending is regulated. There is provision now for covering pre-writ and writ period and third party election spending, presuming this legislation will pass. However, one of the things that I think should concern us equally is that political parties, the Manning Centre, and the Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Liberals have a similar presence wherein they draw from people outside Canada to direct them as to how their political efforts should be framed in terms of policy and the extent to which they represent Canadian interests. Canadian Westminister parliamentary democracy, I think, is being lost by that. The ways in which questions are phrased and the way we campaign are being directed more around the nature of highly partisan American red and blue state dramatics.
9:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
Does it concern you that this bill does nothing to address that foreign funding issue?
9:10 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
I don't know that it concerns me. I think it could be in a separate bill going forward.
9:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Thank you.
For our last intervention, Mr. Cannings, you can have seven minutes. We still have 23 minutes until votes.
9:10 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Thank you both for being here. I regret that I came in late and I missed your presentations, or at least I certainly missed all of yours, Mr. Turmel. It seems I must have missed something quite interesting. I'm not sure what to ask you.
Mr. Marlatt, you don't seem to be a fan of Bill C-23 from the previous Parliament, the Fair Elections Act.
9:10 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
I'm wondering if you could comment for my benefit at least on what you think this present bill achieves in fixing those shortcomings and what [Technical difficulty—Editor]
9:10 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
[Technical difficulty—Editor] the role of the Chief Electoral Officer and Elections Canada in educating and presenting information to the public during an election. Those are the two principal ones I referenced here. As far as Bill C-23 is concerned, I should draw to your attention—and you'll find it appended to this document when you see it in the French and English translation which will be available in a couple of days—that on the recommendation of the Honourable Sinclair Stevens we were going to bring a constitutional challenge to Bill C-23 before the Federal Court and the Supreme Court of Canada, costing a retainer of $350,000, we found.
We talked to the Council of Canadians and the Canadian Federation of Students, which felt that Bill C-23 was suppressing their voting opportunities. The answer we got back from the Council of Canadians, frankly, was that they preferred to go through their own lawyers, through a provincial court. I thought of that as nothing more than a photo op, and that's ultimately what it proved to be.
I am pleased that some of the greatest concerns we have about Bill C-23 are being addressed in this legislation. As you consider the bill I hope you will put the two things together and see what further things you feel should be a part of the way you address it, and things that need to be remedied that we've not identified.
9:10 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Were the court challenges you talked about going to concentrate mainly on the voter suppression aspects of Bill C-23?
9:10 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
Principally.
Again, we did not get to the point of having extended conversations with a constitutional lawyer about that, because the thing passed, in terms of time and so forth. We've had another election since then, with a new government being elected, which considered redressing some of these concerns and is doing so.
I will tell you, and I think this is public knowledge, that in the ACPP meetings on June 8 and 9 of 2015, immediately before the last election, one of the key focuses was on how the changes brought by Bill C-23 could be implemented effectively without influencing the election and that there would probably be a statement by the Chief Electoral Officer afterwards, as I recall and understand what he had said at the time.
Does that help with your question?
9:15 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Yes.
I want to go on to some of your comments about the pre-writ period as it's drawn up in this legislation, and also bringing in the third party funding questions.
It's my understanding—I don't have any notes in front of me; I was kind of brought down from the House to fill in here—that the limit for third party funding in that pre-writ period is either $1 million or $1.5 million.
9:15 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
I think it was $1.5 million.
9:15 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Do you think that is too much? Do you think that gives third parties too much influence, to spend that kind of money during the pre-writ period?
9:15 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
Well in the scheme of things, it's not a lot of money these days. You can buy a car maybe for half a million dollars.
9:15 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
It really depends on how these things are viewed.
I mean, social media campaigns don't cost a lot, but they're loud, they're vocal, and they're often unrepresentative. That's a form of advertising in a way, but it is not—quote, unquote—“advertising”.
There are things that external movements and groups can do to influence election results unfairly. Today, Bill C-45 is being debated in the Senate. There's a very large lobby, which I think has shaped the debate around the issues that Bill C-45 raises. Is that measured by knowledge and science, or is it measured by how social media and campaigning by people who want to benefit financially from the legalization of marijuana want to represent themselves? Do we do that in an election period, and is that fair representation to Canadians?
Those are questions that I think need to be asked when we look at what third parties actually do in the pre-writ period. However, controls by Elections Canada—“controls” is the wrong word—let's say, administration by Elections Canada, I think is helpful.
9:15 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Do you have any thoughts on social media and third parties and election campaigns that you would put in legislation, or is just the general worry?
9:15 p.m.
Communications and Policy Director, Progressive Canadian Party
Social media advertising is one thing, and that's a paid advertisement. It's knowing where things come from. Obviously if that's coming from another country, let's say, to give a good example, the NRA in the United States, it has had a significant influence on the perception by some people about the rights of gun ownership. That will address legislation that's coming forward. It also addressed the repeal of the long-gun registry, I believe.
What is said there is sometimes true and sometimes it's not. There has to be, it seems to me, some way in which we can have some responsibility for truth telling. How do you do that? That's something for legislators to work out. Mind you, if you want to hire me for a study, I'll be happy to do that.