Speaking of candidate nominations …

by kadyomalley on Sunday, August 17, 2008 2:37pm - 0 Comments

SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATES
Take note, Conservative hopefuls – the process of winning your party’s nomination has become distinctly more onerous since the last election – and among the laundry list of new requirements – a thousand dollar “good conduct bond” deposit is now required, as well as at least 25 signatures from local party members – are a couple of changes that seem at least indirectly related to the current dispute with Elections Canada.

A candidate must now agree to “enter into any reasonable financial arrangements with the Conservative Party of Canada concerning the payment for the provision of campaign services by the Party to the candidate” before even being allowed to run for the nomination, and must also sign a confidentiality agreement promising “not to publicly disclose any information concerning the conduct of the application process” (articles 5 and 3b ii, respectively).

Here are the current – as of July 2007 – candidate guidelines:

3. APPLICATION
a. In these Rules, “Nomination Contestant” means a person who has made a valid application under the requirements of this section (Applicant), who is interviewed by the CNC pursuant to section 4b, for whom no report is made to the NCSC that there may be cause to reject the Applicant, and who is not rejected by the NCSC.
Anyone making an application to be a Nomination Contestant must meet the following eligibility requirements at the time of application, failing which the application may not be accepted for processing by the NCSC or the CNC:
i. the Applicant must be eligible to be a candidate under the Canada Elections Act;
ii. unless waived by the Director of Political Operations in consultation with the President of National Council, the Applicant must not have been an unsuccessful candidate in both of the two prior federal general elections;
iii. unless waived by the Director of Political Operations in consultation with the President of National Council, the Applicant must have been a member of the Party for at least six (6) months prior to filing his or her application.
b. Any eligible person wishing to be an Applicant shall provide the CNC with an application consisting of the following documents, substantially in the form set out in the Schedules to these Rules where so indicated:
i. A completed and signed Nomination Contestant Questionnaire (NCQ)
(Schedule A);
ii. A signed Confidentiality Agreement, in which the Applicant agrees not to publicly disclose any information concerning the conduct of the application process (Schedule B);
iii. A copy of the signed consent to act as the Applicant’s financial agent pursuant to section 478.06 of the Canada Elections Act (Schedule C);
iv. An original copy of a current Certificate of Conduct (obtained through the RCMP or local police detachment);
v. Signed authorization for the Party to conduct a credit and criminal records check (Schedule D);
vi. A consent letter to Elections Canada, stating that if nominated, the Party has permission to receive information on the status of their electoral campaign return (Schedule E);
vii. A Nomination Form containing:
1. the Applicant’s name, address, telephone number(s) and email address;
2. the Applicant’s written consent to be a Nomination Contestant;
3. a nomination petition signed by at least twenty-five (25) current EDA Members who reside in the electoral district in which the Applicant wishes to run and who were members at least twenty-one (21) days prior to signing the Nomination Petition; (Schedule F)
viii. A signed declaration stating the agreement of the Applicant that:
1. the National Candidate Selection Committee has authority to disallow his or her candidacy on any grounds it sees fit, which rejection may be appealed to National Council pursuant to these Rules. National Council’s decision shall be final and binding and not further appealed
or challenged;
2. he or she accepts, and agrees to advance, the policies, principles, goals and objectives of the Party;
3. membership information provided by the EDA or Party will be used only for the purpose of campaigning for the nomination, and not for any other purpose;
4. use of the Party logo is not permitted in campaigning for a nomination;
5. if they are successful in winning the nomination, they will participate in training session(s) conducted by the Party on how to run an effective federal election campaign and will agree to enter into any reasonable financial arrangements with the Conservative Party of Canada concerning the payment for the provision of campaign services
by the Party to the candidate. (Schedule G)
ix. Completed forms authorizing the Canada Revenue Agency, the Canada Border Services Agency, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and the Department of National Defence to release any available information through the Privacy Act to the Party concerning any offences, infractions, or pending matters involving the Applicant under an Act, regulation, or Code enforced by those departments; (Schedules H-K);
x. A $1000 certified cheque payable to Conservative Fund Canada from the nomination campaign bank account. This amount serves as a Good Conduct Bond. Provided the Applicant has adhered to these Rules, the Bond will be returned to the financial agent of the Applicant or
Nomination Contestant or candidate, as the case may be (and as such will not constitute a contribution or transfer from the Applicant), as follows

1. for any Applicant who is not accepted as a Nomination Contestant, upon completion of the nomination process;
2. for a Nomination Contestant other than the person who becomes the candidate, upon the completion of the next federal general election;
3. for any person who obtains the nomination and thus becomes the candidate for that Electoral District for the next federal general election, upon obtaining such nomination.
The proceeds of forfeited bonds will be transferred to the EDA.

For comparison, the guidelines that were presumably in place during the last election, as excavated from the archive org cache, circa May 2005.

NOTE: It is possible, but seems unlikely, that the rules were amended before the 2005 campaign. I wasn’t able to find any update to the guidelines posted between May and January 2, 2006, which was the deadline for nominations, but it’s hard to see why the party would initiate such a major change to the process on the eve of an election, especially considering the fact that many of the candidates had been nominated months earlier, in anticipation of a spring election.

5. APPLICATION PROCESS
a.
Any person wishing to be a Nomination Contestant (Applicant) must provide the CNC with an application consisting of the following:
i.    A completed and signed Nomination Contestant Questionnaire (NCQ) (Schedule A);
ii.   A copy of the consent letter from the Financial Agent obtained by the Nomination Contestant pursuant to Section 478.06 of the Canada Elections Act. (Schedule B);
iii. A copy of a current Certificate of Conduct (obtained through the RCMP or local police detachment);
iv. Authorization for the Party to conduct a credit check;
v.   A copy of the consent letter from the Nomination Contestant to Elections Canada, stating that if nominated, the Conservative Party of Canada has the permission to receive information on the status of their Electoral Financial Return;
vi. A Nomination Form containing:
1.   the Applicant’s name, address, telephone number(s) and email address;
2.    the Applicant’s written consent to be a Nomination Contestant;
3.    the name, address, phone number and signature of a member of the EDA who agrees, if the application is approved, to move the nomination:
4.   the name, address, phone number and signature of a member of the EDA who agrees, if the application is approved, to second the nomination.
vii. A signed declaration from the Nomination Contestant acknowledging that the IC has sole authority to reject his or her Application.
viii. Acknowledgement of the policies, principles, goals and objectives of the Party.

UPDATE: In response to a reader request, a link to the current guidelines for Liberal candidates-in-waiting, which does not require that a potential nominee sign a confidentiality agreement, or agree to enter into any “reasonable” financial arrangement with the party.

As yet, I’ve been unable to find similar guidelines for the Green Party, the NDP or the Bloc Quebecois, but will update this post if that changes.

NOTE TO NEW DEMOCRATS, GREENS AND MEMBERS OF THE BLOC QUEBECOIS:

I’ve tried to track down your respective parties’ eligibility rules and guidelines for the nomination of candidates, but I’ve come up short. If you can provide a helpful link, or a copy of the document itself, please let me know. I’m now wildly curious as to whether the Conservative Party is the only one that requires potential nominees to sign a non-disclosure agreement and commit to “any reasonable financial arrangement” that the party proposes.

Bookmark and Share
  • Jack Mitchell

    This is hilarious. But $1000 may not be enough. What price ego?

  • john g

    Well, given the way the Liberals are losing candidates, pretty soon all they’ll be asking for from their candidates is a pulse.

    According to Pundits Guide,

    Langley BC Liberal candidate Jake Gray stepped down in the last few weeks.

    Okanagan-Shuswap BC Liberal candidate Buffy Bambrough stepped down in June.

    Skeena – Bulkley Valley, BC Liberal candidate Corinna Morhart actually resigned last year.

    Not including Morhart, that’s at least 4 candidates who have resigned in the past 2 months.

  • Jason

    Kady, are you planning similar posts for the other parties (including the BQ and GPC)?

  • http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com bigcitylib

    You missed out Van Central, where the Tories have failed to nominate a candidate for years now.

  • Jarrid

    Frankly, any Liberal candidate running west of Sault Ste. Marie who reconsiders his or her election bid is best described as sane.

  • Jarrid

    Hey BCL, the Libs aren’t running a candidate in Central Nova this go round.

    The Libs won the riding as recently as 1993 but this time, out of some weird principle that eludes most lucid commentators, Lizzie May and Stéphane Dion, “idea people” as David Pratt calls them, have decided they won’t challenge each other in their respective ridings. How many votes did the Green Party get in Central Nova 2006 out of the 42,19 votes cast? All of 671. Does it make any sense? About as much sense as an Opposition Leader criticizing a sitting Prime Minister entering the 3rd year of his minority mandate for signalling his intention of going to the polls.

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    Jason – I was hoping to do just that, but unfortunately, I can’t seem to find guidelines for the election of candidates for any other party – other than the Liberals, that is — that document — complete with all required forms — is available here, and does not require potential candidates to agree to either of the terms I highlighted above — the confidentiality agreement, and the promise to enter into “any reasonable financial arrangements” with the party.

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    Yikes. My ability to handcode even the most basic HTML on the fly certainly does suck something fierce, doesn’t it? Anyway, Jason, I’ve added the link to the Liberal guidelines to the original post. Still hunting for the others!

  • http://www.punditsguide.ca Pundits’ Guide

    Hi john g,

    I had the Buffy Bambrough story quite some time ago at the Pundits’ Guide, and just wanted to inject a little balance here to say that we’ve been covering resignations from all parties all along there. Don’t forget that the Liberals have either successfully renominated, or are in the process of renominating, in many of those same ridings.

    Because this week’s story has turned into a bit of a snowball, I’m going to have to do an overall look at the candidate resignation situation now. Honestly, an 18 month election window is going to have this impact to a certain extent, no matter what party. So we need some empirical evidence before us, before anyone makes any conclusions about which party, if any, has been affected more.

    Stay tuned to the Guide for a proper look at it all.

  • http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com The Jurist

    Very interesting. But I’d be especially curious to see what’s in the Schedule G alluded to in Article 5: it doesn’t seem to be included in the linked document, but would seem to set out the exact wording that candidates are required to agree to.

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    You and me both, Jurist – although the non-disclosure agreement may make it difficult to find a candidate willing to provide the full nomination application package.

    Also, I’d just like to thank Pundits’ Guide, once again but likely not for the last time, for service above and beyond the call of duty to political junkies everywhere.

  • Richard

    Given that during the last Conservative leadership race, the party refused to release raw vote numbers to avoid the embarassing revelation that some of their ridings had fewer than ten valid members, one would think that getting 25 signatures might be a tall order in some places…

  • http://www.punditsguide.ca Pundits’ Guide

    Also, I’d just like to thank Pundits’ Guide, once again but likely not for the last time, for service above and beyond the call of duty to political junkies everywhere.

    Well, then, make sure you thank all my readers for keeping me up to date with all this stuff, from right across the spectrum and right across the country. It’s becoming a collaborative effort, no question there.

  • kody in p a

    It’s my understanding that the lists of individuals wanting to run in many of the CPC ridings are getting rediculously long.

    There’s literally a stampede of candidates trying to join Harper’s team.

    Meanwhile, Dion’s dredging up bums from back alleys, getting their nomination papers signed before they sober up.

  • Richard

    “I’ve tried to track down your respective parties’ eligibility rules and guidelines for the nomination of candidates”

    Kady – Why would the New Democratic Party have rules for the sleection of candidates? They harldy need them.

    Seriously – in the last 3 election campaigns, the NDP have nominated (cumulatively) over 900 candidates. I am willing to bet that you can count on two hands the number of ridings (out of 924) where the NDP actually had a vote to choose theuir candidate.

    Given that on average, only about 20 or so of those have ever been incumbents, what does that say about “democracy” in the New “Democratic” Party. It’s why their press releases introducing candidates generally use terms like “named”, or “revealed”, or “selected”.

  • Anon

    “There’s literally a stampede of candidates trying to join Harper’s team.”

    I think that’s unfair. Not everybody asking to sign up could possibly be a bull.

  • penlan

    John G.,

    In response to your comment in pointing out Libs that had stepped down your forgot to mention this from Pundit’s Guide:

    “Conservatives: 10 candidates resigned or stepped down, 5 of whom have been replaced. Add this to 10 incumbents who have announced they will not seek re-election.”

    Just to say that it isn’t all just one party, as you seen to intimate.

  • Jarrid

    Penlan, you forgot to mention the updated Liberal numbers from the same article that you cited:

    “Liberals: 23 candidates resigned or stepped down, 8 of whom have been replaced or have nomination meetings scheduled. Add this to 9 incumbents already retired, and 10 who have announced they will not seek re-election.”

    It does seem to be a more distinctly Liberal phenomenon, n’est-ce pas?

  • john g

    penlan, that is a new post at pundits guide. Those numbers were not there when I made my post yesterday.

    also, of the 10 Conservative candidates who left, 3 were fired, as opposed to stepping down.

    Alice, if you are reading thanks for compiling the numbers! What is the timeframe for this? Since the 2006 election?

  • Davey Boy

    Fair point penlan, but you might have noticed that Garth Turner was included in the Tory ten (as well as the two Ontario candidates removed by the CPC), so it’s not quite apples to apples.

    On the Liberal side the only outliers seem to be Blair Wilson (who was kicked out) and Deborah Coyne who was nominated in Toronto-Danforth (where she ran in 2006) and withdrew, but later sought the nomination in Don Valley West (she later dropped out).

    It’s easy to make too much of this because it happens to all parties at one time or another. The national party tells the riding associations to hurry up and get a candidate. They canvass the ground looking for a big name but, because the party is pushing, do a quicky nomination of some long-serving member as time is of the essence. Six months later, with no election, the candidate realizes that she has put her life on hold for…how long…six, nine, fifteen months, and drops out. It happened with a number of Conservatice candidates between the spring of 05, and the eventual fall of the Martin government that November.

    If there’s a lesson here, it’s that Stephane Dion is reaping what he sowed. He ordered the party to get ready for the spring of 07, and now is discovering that some of the candidates nominated then have better things to do than wait for him to bring down the government, sixteen or so months later. If the Tories get to make hay out his predicament…well, too bad, so sad…he made his own bed. It’s not their fault if he finds it a tad uncomfortable.

  • http://www.punditsguide.ca Pundits’ Guide

    John G: I guess so, but honestly I only started monitoring the nominations regularly since the site first went public, back last October or so. I did know there were a few Conservatives over the Atlantic Accord along with David Chernushenko for the Greens in Ottawa Centre, and one or two NDPers, so I added those.

    A commenter on my site questioned Halton’s inclusion, but he was actually nominated for both parties. Turns out Wajid Khan was too (I should have checked, but there’s this thing called sleep…), so I’ll add him tonight.

    Basically, I tried to document every case I was aware of where the previously duly-selected candidate was no longer the candidate. That was my criterion for inclusion. Now the rest of all you pundits go figure out what it all means. I’m just the Guide …

  • Steph C

    Is this even legal? What does Elections Canada have to say about this gag order?

  • Pingback: Still more on the candidate selection process – Apparently, it really is an honour just to be nominated. : Capital Read : Inside the Queensway : Macleans.ca Blog Central

  • dan in van

    What’s the track record of confidentiality agreements in court? Can the CONs effectively forstall or halt criminal investigations through this demand?
    While society in general has accepted that confidentiality agreements are common in terms of public disclosure, but how does that apply before the arm of the law?

From Macleans