Evidence of meeting #70 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 200.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Robert Sampson  Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor, Democratic Institutions, Privy Council Office
Allen Sutherland  Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office

September 28th, 2017 / 11:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Good morning, and welcome to the 70th meeting of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Today we are beginning our study of Bill C-50, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act (political financing).

We're pleased to have with us today the Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of Democratic Institutions. She is accompanied by officials from the Privy Council Office, Robert Sampson, counsel and senior policy adviser, democratic institutions, and Allen Sutherland, assistant secretary to cabinet, and machinery of government.

Welcome. It's great to have you here, Minister, to help us with Bill C-50, giving us your views, and answering our questions.

I'll turn the floor over to you and thank you very much for coming.

11:05 a.m.

Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Karina Gould LiberalMinister of Democratic Institutions

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone. This is your 70th meeting today. Congratulations for that. It is important.

I will acknowledge, though, that I have mixed feelings about being here today.

I am honoured to be before you again to talk about legislation that makes our democracy more open and transparent, but I'm also saddened to recall that my previous appearances at this committee included the participation of my dear friend and colleague, the member of Parliament for Scarborough—Agincourt, Arnold Chan. He was both an outstanding parliamentarian and a really great guy. His passing has left an enormous gap in this committee and in the House of Commons and, I'm sure, in all of our hearts.

I just wanted to put that on the record.

Our focus today is on Bill C-50, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (political financing). This bill would amend the Canada Elections Act to create an unprecedented level of openness and transparency surrounding political fundraisers.

Bill C-50 required the hard work and dedication of many public servant officials, so before I start, I would like to acknowledge and thank them for their contribution.

Thank you for your commitment to this legislation.

The Government of Canada has promised to set a higher bar on the transparency, accountability, and integrity of our public institutions and the democratic process. Today I'm addressing one of our initiatives that will help reach this objective. This year we celebrate, in addition to the 150th anniversary of Confederation, the 35th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadians cherish our charter. It is a model for new democracies around the world.

Section 3 of the charter guarantees every citizen the right to vote and to run in an election. The freedoms of association and expression enshrined in section 2 of the charter include the right of Canadian citizens and permanent residents to make a donation to a party and to participate in fundraising activities. Of course, these rights are subject to reasonable limitations.

Political parties represent a vital component of our democratic system. They unite people coming to the table from different regions, and with a variety of perspectives, backgrounds, and experiences. Parties mobilize ordinary citizens to champion ideas and work to get others to join them.

In my speech in the House of Commons, I quoted former Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci. He said, “Political parties provide individual citizens with an opportunity to express an opinion on the policy and functioning of government.”

Each time that Canadians vote in an election for a political party that shares their objectives or world view, it is one of the ways in which they play an active and engaged role in their society. We see this as an opportunity to make our country a better place for our children and grandchildren. Some Canadians even choose to work or volunteer for a political party.

But not everyone has the time or inclination to become active in politics as a volunteer. Perhaps they can do that, and something else as well. Still, they may want their voices heard. For many Canadians, making a financial contribution to a political campaign is a meaningful way to play a direct role in our democracy and an important form of democratic expression. Choosing to financially support a political party is something we must continue to uphold and protect.

Everyone in this room knows that donations given by people who believe in us, who believe in what we stand for, make our work possible, and we must continue to ensure that Canadians are free to contribute to political parties in an open and transparent manner.

It bears noting that Canada is known around the world for the rigour of its political financing regime. Companies, industry associations, unions, or any organization for that matter, cannot give funds to any politician or political party, and there's a strict limit on individual contributions. Canadian citizens and permanent residents can contribute a maximum of $1,550 annually to each of the following: a registered party, a leadership contestant, and an independent candidate. In addition, they can donate a total of $1,550 to a contestant for nomination, a candidate in an election, and/or a riding association. Contributions are reported to Elections Canada and the name, municipality, province, and postal code of those who contribute more than $200 are published online.

Bill C-50 will build on this existing regime. Where a fundraising event requires any attendee to contribute or pay a ticket price totalling more than $200, the name and partial address of each attendee, with certain exceptions, will be published online. The exceptions are: youth under 18, volunteers, event staff, media and support staff for the minister or party leader in attendance.

As I said during second reading debate in the House of Commons, Canadians take political fundraising seriously. There are serious consequences for disobeying the law, and that is why the Canada Elections Act provides tough sanctions for those who break the rules. The penalties include fines of up to $50,000, up to five years in jail, or both.

Although Canadians can be proud of our already strict regulations for political financing, we recognize that they have the right to know even more than they do now when it comes to political fundraising events.

Bill C-50 aims to provide Canadians with more information about political fundraising events in order to continue to enhance trust and confidence in our democratic institutions.

If passed, Bill C-50 would allow Canadians to learn when a political fundraiser that has a ticket price or requires a contribution above $200 is happening and who attended.

This legislation would apply to all fundraising activities attended by cabinet ministers, including the Prime Minister, party leaders, and leadership contestants when a contribution or ticket price of more than $200 is required of any attendee. This provision also applies to appreciation events for donors to a political party or contestant.

These provisions apply to all parties with a seat in the House of Commons.

Bill C-50 would require parties to advertise fundraising events at least five days in advance. Canadians would know about a political fundraiser before the event takes place, giving them an opportunity to inquire about a ticket, if they wish.

Bill C-50 would also give journalists the ability to determine when and where fundraisers are happening. At the same time, political parties would retain the flexibility to set their own rules for providing media access and accreditation.

Parties would be required to report the names and partial addresses of attendees to Elections Canada within 30 days of the event. That information would then become public.

The bill would also introduce new offences in the Canada Elections Act for those who don't respect the rules, and require the return of any money collected at the event. These sanctions would apply to political parties, rather than the senior political leaders invited to the events.

We propose a maximum $1,000 fine on summary conviction for offences introduced under Bill C-50. And if rules are broken, then contributions collected at events would have to be returned.

This new level of transparency will further enhance Canadians' trust in the political system, and that's good for everyone. If passed, Bill C-50 would fulfill our government's promise to make Canada's political financing system much more transparent to the public and the media. This is one of many actions we are taking to improve, strengthen, and protect our democratic institutions.

We are also taking action to increase voter participation and to enhance the integrity of elections through Bill C-33, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act, and we have partnered with the Communications Security Establishment to protect Canada's democracy from cyber-threats.

As I noted in my speech in the House of Commons, Samara Canada issued a report indicating 71% of Canadians said they are fairly satisfied or very satisfied with how democracy works in Canada. While this report suggests that Canadians have confidence in their democracy, we recognize there is always room for improvement. That's why we've decided to shine a light on political fundraising activities and build upon our already strong and robust system for political financing in Canada.

I am eager to hear the opinions of committee members. This is important legislation that affects all of us, and I hope you share my desire to ensure Canadians know more about fundraising events.

I look forward to your questions.

Thank you for the invitation to be here before you today.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Thank you very much, Minister.

Now we go to the seven-minute round, and we'll start with Ms. Tassi.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Thank you, Minister, for attending today and for your presentation.

With respect to the advertising of the event on the political party's website, can you expand on when that has to happen, in what cases it has to happen, and the timing?

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

As outlined in the legislation, if a cabinet minister, prime minister, party leader, or leadership contestant is present at an event where they are raising funds for a political party, for themselves, or for a riding association, the event must be prominently displayed and advertised five days in advance on a party's central website.

The ownership resides both within the party and the organizing entity to ensure that this information is publicly available. The location of the event, the time it is happening and the date, the price and the contribution required must be on that advertisement, as well as contact information for an organizer so members of the public or the media may be able to inquire about the event itself.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Okay, that's great.

I know the amount that was chosen is $200. I know it's hard to choose an amount. Can you expand on why that was the amount where this would apply?

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

Yes. With regard to public disclosure, $200 is already in the Canada Elections Act. Information about individuals who make contributions of $200 or more is publicly disclosed on Elections Canada's website. It's an agreed upon disclosure amount that already exists, that's why this level was chosen.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Thank you.

I know you spoke briefly about the penalties. There's the $1,000 fine, and also if the rules aren't followed, the contributions may be returned. Can you talk a little about how that decision is made and if there's any recourse? If, for example, a mistake was made, a name was left out, that sort of situation, how would that be handled?

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

The intent is not to penalize people who make mistakes or where accidents happen, but rather entities or individuals who are deliberately trying to hide information. As in all the penalties and processes within Elections Canada, a process is always followed, and a dialogue about this ensues between either the Chief Electoral Officer or the commissioner of Elections Canada and individuals, parties, or political entities.

Of course, the penalties would be on a graduated system. There's an opportunity for organizers to submit the information that was lacking if it was accidental.

However, if this is not the case and it was discovered to be intentional, then there's a sliding scale of penalties that range from the maximum being a $1,000 fine and.... The legislation says that as soon as a political entity learns they have contravened the rules, they must return the donations. I might ask my officials to jump in just for the technical details.

I'm going to turn to one of my officials to clarify that.

11:15 a.m.

Robert Sampson Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor, Democratic Institutions, Privy Council Office

Thank you, Minister.

As soon as the person who has breached one of the terms of the bill becomes aware, they have 30 days to return the amount of the contributions.

In terms of the graduated approach to penalties and enforcement, as with all offences and breaches under the Canada Elections Act, the commissioner of Canada Elections has a number of options and tools available, starting with a caution letter, then a compliance agreement. There's a $1,000 fine upon prosecution and conviction, so that would be reserved for the most serious instances.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

That's very good to hear. We don't want people penalized for an inadvertent error. You're making it clear that it has to be intentional. There's been a lot of notice. That's great.

With respect to the list of the names of those who appear, I know that a group is excluded in the bill: volunteers, minors, journalists, and people providing services.

What about guests who appear as guests? Say an MP in the Hamilton area is having an event and I show up as a guest but I'm not paying, and the minister is going to be present. What's my obligation? Do I simply put my name on the list? I'm there and I'm not paying the fee, but it's important that if I don't pay a fee my name is still on the list. Is that the requirement?

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

Yes, it's not your individual obligation, it would be the obligation of the organizing entity—

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Right, yes.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

—to ensure that everyone who is present, and not one of those exceptions, would be reported on.

The idea is that if you're hosting a fundraising event and an individual purchases a table, all of those guests must be reported on even if they did not specifically make a contribution to the party or political entity specifically.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Right.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

It's to capture that so it's clear who is attending these events so that the public has access to this information. Of course, they can go through it and scrutinize it and pose questions or raise issues that they may see as a result of being able to see exactly who is present at these events.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Okay, that's great. The focus is on presence and it's not on the payment, which is good.

How much time do I have, Chair?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

You have 45 seconds.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Okay.

Could you speak a little about how the rules apply during a general election?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

Yes.

Recognizing that things are always a little more hectic during a general election, we have modified the advertising in advance and reporting regulations so that there is not the requirement to advertise in advance during a general election; however, all events with a contribution required of $200 or more would be required to be reported on within 60 days of the end of the election.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Now we'll go to Mr. Reid.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

First of all, just let me make a comment about our colleague, Arnold, who would have had a lot of thoughtful insights were he to be present at today's meeting.

I know, Minister, you were at his service on the weekend. I saw you there. It was a very busy service. There were a lot of people there. I saw at least three of the colleagues who are here, and I know there were others whom I didn't see. It's just an indication of how well respected he was on all sides of the House.

I want to ask you, if I might test the chair's indulgence on this point a little bit, about a matter that is not the matter on which you are appearing before us. It's not about Bill C-50; rather it's about the legislation that may be forthcoming regarding the subject matter of the CEO's report on the 42nd election.

What we've been trying to determine here in this committee is whether your legislation is likely to be forthcoming soon or whether it's further away. That will determine our course of action. Do we reopen our discussions into that matter, or do we just say that there is no point in pursuing it, there is not time for us to report back to you, for the information to get to you, or for the legislative drafting to occur?

I know when you were asked by the media, you were reluctant to respond. You want to make those comments in Parliament first, but we're now in Parliament so I thought I could maybe prevail upon you.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

As the member knows, I'm very indulgent and I leave it up to the witnesses. They don't have to answer things that aren't on the subject, but they're welcome to.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON

I'm happy to answer this as a first question.

First of all, I want to thank all the members of this committee, and particularly the different parties, for the report that you have already provided to me, as well as the reports that were provided over the summer, because those have all gone into the thinking as to what I'm considering in terms of moving forward.

I am hopeful to be able to do something soon, but to be able to speak much more broadly on that, I probably can't before I speak about it in the House. I would say that everything that has been provided is going into my considerations for next steps, and I do really appreciate the work that has been done, and the additional work that was done by each of the parties on this committee over the summer. That was an important deadline for next steps.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

I think I can parse the words. My own sense is that further pursuit by this committee of work in that direction might get to you after your own internal deadline. I think that's what I heard. Although you didn't actually say that, I think that's what I read between the lines.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for your indulgence on that matter.

Let me turn, then, to Bill C-50. I would just say that I find the bill unobjectionable, but also not really very substantive in that holding a fundraiser, which has been characterized as a cash-for-access fundraiser or a pay-to-play fundraiser, is not against the law. Once the legislation is passed, it still won't be against the law. There will be some reporting requirements, but nothing will have changed substantially.

The thing that people objected to has also not been addressed. The objection was that if you have sufficient money to buy tickets, you can have access to the direct presence of a minister of the crown, or indeed to the prime minister. I don't see that as having been resolved. The issue was never that the law was being violated. It was that a kind of ethical sniff test was not being met. I just don't see any evidence that this is actually being addressed.

Let me ask the obvious question. Why didn't you pass a law that said, as it did in Ontario, you can't have this kind of event, full stop?