Evidence of meeting #72 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 donations.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I appreciate the invitation to do that, to think more about this.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Mr. Richards commented on a couple of the scenarios that have been raised in the past. The only other scenario was about the notice period, if notice was put out five days in advance but it had already been sold out; for example, if there was an event with the Prime Minister or with the minister at $1,500, but by the time it was posted online the obligatory five days in advance, it was already sold out.
Do you see a way the legislation could address situations like that, in which something is posted and it's publicly available but people can't actually buy a ticket because it's sold out?
12:55 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I don't think I can, no. This is where you're dealing with something in the law: this is the step, and at that step you do this, and under that step you don't do it. You cannot have flexible steps all the time. It makes it impossible to run anything. Five days is it. At least you get to know who's going to be there with the suggestion that I made earlier. If it were already known, at least it would be known at the same time that the people would have known that the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance, the Leader of the Opposition, the finance critic, or the leader of the...whatever, would be in attendance. I'm not focusing on primarily one office-holder here.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Something we haven't discussed much is media presence. We haven't talked a lot about media being present there. We're talking about all these people showing up and underhanded things happening, but I think that's probably something that is creating even more—furthering, I guess—transparency: when we allow people with cameras and recorders to be at the event.
What do you think about that step being taken in the legislation?
12:55 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I'm in favour of that. If the media wish to attend, I certainly think they should be able to attend and to record what is happening, or at least write down what is happening. I'm not sure that I agree that they should be able to take actual footage. If that's in the statute, that's in the statute, but I personally didn't see that in the bill.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
I think having five days' notice has now allowed media to be aware of these events that once used to take place—
12:55 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
That's very favourable; that's very good. They can decide if they want to be in attendance or not.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
At our last meeting, we talked a fair bit about there not being a required amount listed ahead of time, but there being a pass-the-hat type of thing and some kind of influence at the event to donate a recommended amount. What do you think about that? Should that be captured under this legislation, or should it just be the required amount?
12:55 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Well, pass-the-hat events are already under the statute. They're allowed, and I don't see a need to amend that. It's very hard to visualize a political party organizing a major financial event and saying, “under $200 and we'll have all of these outstanding figures from the party attending.” I guess it could happen. I'm not sure that it needs to be caught under the legislation.
1 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
You have already mentioned that you are not in favour of lowering the amount to $100. The main point of our last guest here today, from Democracy Watch, was that we should be following the amendments made in Quebec and that we should lower it to $100. He also made claims that even volunteerism and doctors receiving free samples.... Everything causes a human being to be influenced and to act favourably toward one person rather than another because the person has done something for them.
I just want your general opinion about how we, as a good, democratic country and as people who want to be ahead of the curve on stamping out corruption and be seen as having a fair, transparent system, reach that balance. We need volunteers, and we need people to contribute to political parties but at the same time we don't want there to be undue influence on decisions being made.
1 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
We found it: $1,550. It's a reasonable amount. You could have said $2,000 and I would have said yes, that's okay. I don't think that members of Parliament as a group can be influenced by a $1,500 contribution.
1 p.m.
Liberal
1 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
That's why I don't agree with the need to reduce it. If it were $50,000, that would be something else, but $1,500, to my mind, does not do it, because you need so many $1,500 contributions.
The concern one would have about $1,500 would be about a particular group of people agreeing among themselves, who have a particular interest to bring forward, and they bunch up. They are effectively buying the table, 10 seats, for $15,000. When we see this, this is where it grates the spirit and it grates how Canadians feel about money in politics.
1 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
My experience has been that you're also going to have a group of $15,000 on the other side of it giving their opinion as well, so you end up having challenges with any policy, because you always have people with diverse opinions throughout your riding and even your donors will have diverse opinions on any given matter.
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Thank you, Ruby.
Thank you very much for being here today. You always have some very creative ideas for us, and we really appreciate that.
1 p.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
It was a pleasure. Thank you very much for the opportunity.
1 p.m.
Liberal