Happy International Tyranny of the Majority Day, everyone!

by kadyomalley on Monday, September 15, 2008 9:17am - 23 Comments

Or, as it is more commonly known, International Day of Democracy.

To mark the occasion, Marc Mayrand – Chief Electoral Officer and star of many fantastically convoluted conspiracy theories involving police raids and Liberal camera crews – sat down with the Ottawa Citizen, where he cheerfully discussed some of the initiatives underway at Elections Canada to reach out to the chronically franchise-challenged – youth, aboriginal voters, Canadian Forces members posted abroad.

He was, however,  careful to avoid saying anything that could come back to haunt him if the ongoing investigation into the Conservatives’ in and out election spending scheme results in charges being laid under the Election Act:

Eighteen months ago, Marc Mayrand toiled in obscurity as the federal superintendent of bankruptcy, a position so absent of political import that many on Parliament Hill wouldn’t even know it exists.

But since his appointment as the country’s chief electoral officer, the soft-spoken bureaucrat has clashed with the Conservative party over campaign finances and faced multipartisan outrage over his interpretation of the election law that allows voters to cast ballots while wearing face coverings. He’s been dragged into court over the in-and-out scheme, called to testify before parliamentary committees and endured the governing party voting against a House of Commons motion expressing confidence in his agency. Oh, and he’s also had to put together seven byelections and is now hosting the $280-million party that is Canada’s 40th general election.

“It’s a learning experience,” he said with a smile in an interview yesterday. “I’m not used to being in the middle of those kinds of disputes.”

He is clearly uncomfortable with all the attention.

“My personal philosophy is that the regulator should not be front-and-centre of the action.”

He declined to discuss the in-and-out case, which is before the courts, but said his agency has “taken notice” of the Conservatives’ vote of non-confidence. “The majority of MPs voted in support and showed confidence in Elections Canada,” he said.

Which, of course, is perfectly true: three out of the four parties in the House voted in favour of a motion to “to express its full and complete confidence in Elections Canada and the Commissioner of Elections Canada.” One  — did not.

Oh, and in the same story, Glen McGregor catches the Conservative Party committing another photo-related faux pas. No, not more copyright infringement – although come to think of it, after prudently pruning notaleader.ca of various video clips that the party was using without permission, shouldn’t the official site get a going over as well, since many of the same snippets also appear there?

Anyway, this time, it’s one for the Unintentionally ironic Usage of Stock Footage: Apparently, the beatific beach-roaming family that graces the latest round of ads, depicted as potential victims of Dion’s dastardly plot to yank back the Tories’ $100 a month child care benefit are actually Americans – and at least one is a registered Democrat.

UPDATE: I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but I note that two of my favourite C/conservative (I never like to assume voting patterns, y’all) commenters are in a lather over Stephane Dion’s leadership debt repayment schedule — just like the Senior Tory Spokesperson who delivered yesterday’s week one wrapup told reporters was going to be on the agenda for the party this week:

The Conservative campaign will make a series of announcements related to bread-and-butter issues that directly impact average families. They will also attack Stephane Dion over his lingering leadership debt, questioning how he can be trusted to run the nation’s finances.

Anyway, I’d tell you to feel free to use this as an open thread to “question how he can be trusted to run the nation’s finances,” but it seems that you’re way ahead of me, so — carry on!

Bookmark and Share
  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    It’s a shame that McGregor decided to talk with Maynard on ways to corrupt out voting system even more than it already is instead of asking about J Kay’s allegations that Dion is not following his fixed repayment schedule.

    Voters want to know who Dion is in hock to and how that will affect his policies if he becomes PM, slight chance to be sure but you never know.

  • john g

    “Apparently, the beatific beach-roaming family that graces the latest round of ads, depicted as potential victims of Dion’s dastardly plot to yank back the Tories’ $100 a month child care benefit are actually Americans – and at least one is a registered Democrat.”

    Wow. Kady, this is so trivial I can’t believe you even wasted the time it took to type this.

    Did anyone ask Mayrand about how lenient EC is being with respect to Stephane Dion’s never-ending loan repayment schedule?

    How about whether or not EC will be investigating the “campaign of intimidation” against the Conservatives apparently, according to Fife, being waged by Danny Williams? If EC can’t be bothered to look into this Mugabe-like display, then I’d say the vote of non-confidence expressed by the Conservatives is well founded.

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

    Actually, if voters do want to know “who he’s in hock to”, they can get all the details on the Elections Canada website. The repayment schedules aren’t yet online, but are publicly available through the agency, and have, of course, been reported on by the media.

  • Dr Riff

    does anyone know what happened with the o’jays copyright infringement case against the conservatives “for the love of money”?

  • Alan

    “If EC can’t be bothered to look into this Mugabe-like display,…”

    So, you’re suggesting that what Danny Williams is doing is equivalent to torturing and murdering hundreds or thousands of people? Let’s try to keep some perspective on this.

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    Alan

    Fife made the comparison on CTV first, I believe. I agree that it was a ridiculous thing to say.

  • Dije

    But wait, CTV is calling it a ‘Campaign of Intimidation’ when someone is so vocally against the Conservatives? This is the worse case of liberal media bias I have seen yet.

    john g – I thought that was a clip of Danny Williams I saw with a machete in hand, ‘ABC’ written across his forehead in blood. And Mayrand in the background, egging him on, wearing a big smirk and a Liberal t-shirt.

  • Jen

    I really don’t think people understand how hard hit families were hit when this child benefit system came in. The back to school fund was suddenly gone, none of these people had money to buy new clothes, notebooks or school supplies of any kind for their kids as the new system sort of took over.

    Instead of changing the program and re-labelling it as ‘child benefit’ they should have just given more money to the system and the people that it was meant to support.

    I hate lies, and the biggest lies are the ones people tell you about how well the government is taking care of the poor or the disabled. Ontario is in one of the worst situations in our country where this is concerned. It needs to change.

    Go Green!

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    “They will also attack Stephane Dion over his lingering leadership debt, questioning how he can be trusted to run the nation’s finances.”

    Kady

    Personally, I wouldn’t take that angle but it’s nice the issue is being raised at all. Liberals always go on and on and on about Con ‘secret agendas’ so I would fight back on that front.

    Who’s Dion in debt to and what favours will he do for them if he becomes PM?

    I don’t know how solid Kay’s accusations are, he doesn’t seem to know himself, but I love rabble rousing so I would throw the accusations around and see what sticks.

  • john g

    OK, comparisons to Mugabe was a bit of hyperbole and going a bit too far. My apologies.

    But EC needs to follow up on this. Section 482 of the Elections act:

    482. Every person is guilty of an offence who

    (a) by intimidation or duress, compels a person to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate at an election; or

    (b) by any pretence or contrivance, including by representing that the ballot or the manner of voting at an election is not secret, induces a person to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate at an election.

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

    JWL, you can find all that stuff out – all donations are listed on the Elections Canada website, at the URL I posted. The rules have changed, and leadership contestants are obliged to disclose all financial information, including donations, expenses and loan financing. I understand the urge to rabblerouse, but things have changed since the wild west days when parties were in charge of running their own races, and donations to leadership contestants were largely undocumented. You might recall that Stephen Harper, in fact, has been chided for failing – still – to disclose donors to his 2002 leadership campaign. These days, it’s not optional.

  • Alex

    John,

    I’m sure you will be providing arguments soonest with regard to how exactly Williams is using “intimidation or duress,” or is convincing Newfoundlanders that the ballot is no longer secret.

    By your logic, no party should rightly be able to campaign, in case they convince voters not to support another party.

    Seriously, who’s grasping at straws now?

  • john g

    Alex, watch the Fife piece.

    Williams is apparently threatening to, for example, destroy the family business of those who help work on the CPC campaign. Are you seriously OK with that?

  • Alex

    Thanks John, I’ll look that up.

    And obviously, no I wouldn’t be cool with threats like that. I’d hate to think that it’s true. Hopefully something that’s just been maliciously spun or taken out of context?

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

    John G – Do you know if any of the people who have claimed that Williams – or anyone else, for that matter – has employed “intimidation or duress” as part of the ABC campaign have contacted Elections Canada to complain?

    I mean, these are very serious allegations, and I agree that they should be investigated if there is evidence – sworn statements, maybe, from those who say they have been targeted – to back them up.

    But Williams’ office has denied the charge, which means that at this point, it’s going to take someone going public, on the record, with specific examples — dates, names of persons involved, exact nature of threats, that sort of thing.

    If it’s just a whisper campaign, I’m not sure if that’s a road that Mayrand should be going down, given the potential to inadvertently give undue weight to rumour and innuendo.

  • john g

    No, I don’t know Kady. And your point is quite valid.

    But in a situation like this, people may be afraid to speak up, and I wonder if EC has any discretion to unilaterally investigate something like that without a formal complaint, especially when its reported by a major media outlet.

    It’s terrible actually having to wonder about how “free and fair” our elections really are when you hear about stuff like this.

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

    For all I know, they may indeed be looking into it — witness how quickly they moved to check the legality of the Facebook vote swap group, although that was an easier call to make since it was all out in public. It’s harder to make that call when the alleged dirty tricks are ostensibly taking place behind closed doors.

  • David

    The Tories have had serious difficulties getting canadidates in NL, resorting to parachute candidates in several ridings. Nobody has asked hard questions about why.

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

    David – If it was, say, the Liberals having trouble getting candidates, would we assume that it was because of intimidation? Or that they couldn’t find anyone willing to be the sacrificial lamb?

  • David

    You wouldn’t assume that under other circumstances, probably, no.

    Probably not in other provinces, either.

    Certainly not since Maurice Duplessis kicked the bucket.

  • dan in van

    Let me get this straight, CONs want what is considered by nearly everyone but themselves — Elections Canada — to investigate their pet targets for things that there are either no complaints against or no proof of? Yet they still hold EC in low esteem for holding their own party to the letter of the law. Despite having appointed the head officer, who seems to have put his job and duty before party affiliation and thuggery.
    Maybe your Mugabe allusion fits, but not the way you think of…

  • dan in van

    That should read…

    considered by nearly everyone but themselves — Elections Canada — a respected part of the democratic process…

    Sometimes my own partisanship gets ahead of me sometimes.

  • Phillip Huggan

    I hope Williams kicks the crap out of everyone in NFLD until they vote ABC. You have police forces beating up innocent pot dealers in Vancouver instead of investigating a serial killer. You have a mafia force in Toronto’s largest police office; 30 who knew of exortions assaults and robbery and probably at least half heard rumours of or obstructed the investigation (the kind of conspiracy laws were designed to charge Hell’s Angels with), and an Ontario court that sympathetically throws out the case. You have a police officer in Wpg kill someone while driving drunk and getting a conspiracy of special treatment; the latter is what infuriates me. You have a Canadian public that doesn’t realize the media it treats as public education wants low taxes; every newspaper and broadcater endorsed S.Harper last election save CBC and Torstar.
    Now you have a threat to the survival of civilization and a (200x worse the WWII) preventable Holocaust in the making that has finally captured the public’s imagination and a poll show people still think all parties have identical enviro-platforms. Give em hell Danny.

    Macleans back issues I’ve read claim Baird replacing Ambrose is finally addressing AGW and compare S.Harper, the #2 world obstacle to addressing AGW, to JFK, the man who did address the civilization threat of nuke war. We had a perfectly good treaty that put developing countries on the hook after 2012, giving them a free pass from 2008-2012, that S.Harper broke. Back to square one assuming no one stands up for the future and retailiates.

From Macleans