Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Meanwhile, at the Federal Court of Appeal

by Aaron Wherry on Tuesday, March 1, 2011 4:23pm - 62 Comments

A bulletin from Canadian Press.

The Federal Court of Appeal has struck down a ruling which Conservatives say cleared them of any wrongdoing in the so-called in-and-out election financing scheme. The ruling confirms Elections Canada’s interpretation of electoral spending laws

The court says it was reasonable for the elections watchdog to be dissatisfied with the way the Conservative party reported national advertising expenses for the 2006 election.

The full ruling is here.

Tags: elections canada, Federal Court of Appeal, in-and-out

More by Aaron Wherry

noob_goldberg

This was, of course, an administrative ruling. Or something.

Dave

Lawyers go in. Decisions come out. In. And out. In. And out. In. And out.

noob_goldberg

See, that's why I could never be a lawyer; I invariably succumb to premature abrogation.

Dave

There's a pill for that. Or is that for electile dysfunction? Bah, either way, just pop a pill.

Mike T.

In all fairness, this probably just means EC can withhold the conservatives rebates until the investigation and trials are over.

Note: I haven't read the case yet.

noob_goldberg

The Globe won't even allow comments for "legal reasons".
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/appe…

The only thing it adds is:

"The expenses were claimed as local advertising by 67 Tory candidates.

Elections Canada maintains the scheme allowed the national party to exceed its spending limit by more than $1-million, while letting candidates claim rebates on expenses they hadn't actually incurred.

The court ruling relates to a civil suit launched by two of the candidates.

Late last week, charges of wilfully overspending were laid against the party and four of its top campaign and fundraising officials, including two senators. "
lgarvin

Note: I haven't read the case yet.

You really should. It's going to make your day, your week and possibly even your month. It's a pretty categorical defeat.

Mike T.

As far as I know it isn't available yet…

lgarvin

It's linked above in Aaron's post.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49807655/Full-Ruling

Mike T.

I see it now, thanks!

SanDiegoDave

D'OH!
tobyornotoby

So now it's okay that Elections Canada charged Gerstein and Finley?
OriginalEmily1

Well there goes THAT little talking point, eh Cons?
Anon 001

Ouch. Quick .. new talking points … fast … judges … liberal … courts left-wing …. everyone is innocent … must appeal to Supreme Court ….. love the troops.

Jan

New fundraising letter – help we need money for lawyers!
BCer in Mtl

AAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDSSSSSSSSCCCCCCCCCCCCCAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!

Reader

Lol

Mike T.

We shall know soon enough!
NoNameCS

Well, they tried the "administrative issue", the " nothing to see here", the "Elections Canada are Liberal shills", the "But everyone else has been doing it", and "Elections Canada is pursuing this despite the fact that the courts have cleared the Conservative Party"… What's next ?

I'm betting the courts will be liberal appointees and elections spending laws will be deemed anti-democratic.
Jan

And there goes the Con's number one talking point. Poilievre will have to be re-programmed.

tedbetts

I expect will be hearing a lot of references to the Sponsorship Scandal in the next few days.

Anon ABC

They are already trying: … but this is our (Conservative party's) own money unlike Adscam. We just have to keep reminding them that the 67 had tried to get GST rebates which were NOT Conservative party money.

In fact, as I remember, EC said that they had already issued GST rebates to a few candidates before they had realized what was happening and stopped doing so. Thus some rebates had been actually issued.

Matlock

It is far more lucrative than a GST rebate they're after. Campaign expenses are reimbursable up to 60% from the government.

For the amount in dispute ($1.3 million), it's a big chunk of money (approx $780,000).
Reverend_Blair

60% of one million is $600,000 of taxpayer's money, Anon ABC. More than that, this is looking very much like a purposeful attempt to undermine our democratic institutions.

Also, since the advertising firm involved says they didn't issue the receipts in question and those receipts look like they drawn up by whatever monkey Oda employees to scribble "not" on official documents, it seems there are more questions here. Falsifying receipts seems fraudulent to me, and it certainly hints at money laundering.

Reverend_Blair

Just watching Power and Politics and it looks like the Conservatives might have made up their own invoices with somebody else's name on them. The tip-off seems to be the mis-spelling of the word invoice…the 67 invoices in question spell it "nvoice."
In addition to that, the invoices are from the riding offices to the federal party, and the advertising company whose name is on the invoices say they never dealt with the riding level.

Could there be regular fraud afoot as well as electoral fraud?

Jan

Foiled by a typo. Damn! Otherwise the plan was foolproof.

Keith in Brampton

I wonder why no one thought to go with a handwritten ^I? I'm sure if they'd just asked Bev, she could have fixed 'em all right up!

Holly Stick

Then they would have been NOTvoices.

lgarvin

In believe in the Conservative Party that would be UNvoices.

tedbetts

Time to advance DefCon levels

Defend Conservatives1 (DefCon1) – If an issue arises, say it's a non story – Unsuccessful

DefCon2 – If the issue won’t go away, then blame the media – Unsuccessful

DefCon3 – If the issue still won’t go away, then blame the Liberals – Unsuccessful

DefCon4 – If the issue still won’t go away, then blame a bureaucrat or provincial premier – Unsuccessful

DefCon5 – If the issue still won’t go away, then blame a staffer – Throw Finley and Granatstein under the bus?

DefCon6 – If the issue still won’t go away, then start talking about Adscam, coalitions, broken GST promises and the NEP – You can bet on it

BCer in Mtl

I think for Level 6 they will need to invoke the TCPL scandal as well ~ 1956
Dave

Listening to Pierre Poilievre right now, he's at DefCon7: Liberals did it too!

And it's Gerstein.

tedbetts

I consider that to be "Blame the Liberals"

Dave

I'd distinguish between "Blame the Liberals (for male-pattern baldness, which us virtuous Conservatives would abolish)" and "Liberals did it (which makes it OK for us to do it too)."

Matlock

"DefCon5 – If the issue still won’t go away, then blame a staffer – Throw Finley and Granatstein under the bus?"

I doubt it. Finley and Gerstein aren't just low level staffers. In the Tory party hierarchy, this is somewhat approaching Darth Vader betraying the Emperor.
gottabesaid

I've predicted that the next move will be "It's a stupid law anyway. Why should there be limits on how much of our money we can spend? This is stupid?" Not sure where that fits into the DefCon system.

Crit_Reasoning

I wonder if the Conservatives are going to appeal this ruling to the Supreme Court.

Mike T.

I doubt it. If there are convictions in the pending Criminal trials, sure, but this is just whether EC had to accept resubmitted reports.
Jan

Poilievre saying of course we will appeal. We have a strong case. All the other parties do it. We're standing behind the two Senators. And my personal favourite – Elections Canada only knows about these expenses because we told them about them. Yeah Pierre because you were going for broke – trying to get those rebates. Greed is always what gets crooks.

tedbetts

Yeah, I LOVE that one.

We're only getting charged because we got caught!

Jan

Now Solberg has taken over – we've only been charged. Lots were actually convicted in – wait for it – Adscam.
He's sticking with the it's only administrative. Great Bagdad Bob imitation.

LaxAtlDfwYow

Appeal to the SCoC? Nope. The CPC doesn't need to.

They will simply stall, delay and obfuscate until the next election after which they will have their majority (sad to say). Once firmly ensconced in a position of completely unbridled power I expect they will replace the leadership at EC and the Election Commissioner, concede the money issues, cop pleas on the individual charges and re-write the election laws to (a) eliminate the per vote subsidy (b) continue the ban on corporate and union donations and (c) permit in & out and anything else they see as advantageous to them.

An appeal to the SCoC can be simply denied.. Too much risk in that. Better to stall and take revenge later.

Hell, it's what I'd do.

Olivier

Unfortunately this yet another mistake that the CPC will not likely suffer from. Although this one isn't anywhere near as bad as the Oda case, it might get more traction in the public's eyes since the court are involved.

Reverend_Blair

Well, it probably won't bring on the Harpocalypse, but things are beginning to pile up. It's like a new scandal every week with these guys.
NorthernPoV

huh?
Election fraud trumps lying to Parliament.

Loraine Lamontagne

Two hours later…. and the Cons still haven't received their talking points.
http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

This kinda fits in with Jason Kenny's narrative that these blasted judges won't rule the way we the government want them to.

EeeOar

Judge made law, etc….

Dave

It's the Stupid Charter.
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2004/2004scc33/2…

LaxAtlDfwYow

Question: has this FCA decision made a spring 2011 election more or less likely?

I vote more likely. In combo w/ the 4 charges laid last week, the CPC can stall for some months but not for a year. Fall brings conflicts w/ provincial votes. So now or a year from now.

What say you?

brooster2

I agree…they'll tie this up in court long enough to get an election behind them. This spring. In the meantime, we'll be hearing "we can't comment on a matter that's before the courts".

LdKitchenersOwn

I agree…they'll tie this up in court long enough to get an election behind them.

Not if the SCOC refuses to hear the case (that won't happen I don't think, but it's not impossible).

frobisher

If the oppo looks at this as you do, they may well decide to let it ride 'til 2012 in the hopes of convictions, some choice perp walk pics and the opportunity to scream 'Thief and Liar', none of which is guaranteed. So they poison pill the budget? How they might do that in a way that's tasty and palatable to the voting public is currently beyond ken,

But your observations re: possible outcomes relative to possible windows is bang on.
Reverend_Blair

They'll be going in the spring. There are a myriad of reasons, and this doesn't really change them. It does give the opposition parties something to talk about though.
lgarvin

Question: has this FCA decision made a spring 2011 election more or less likely?

More likely, I think.

The opposition parties would be crazy to let this kind of opportunity slip away.

OriginalEmily1

Kudos to David Marler…the only Conservative candidate who refused to participate in the party's in-and-out election financing scheme!
http://www.mysask.com/portal/site/main/template.M…
chet

More talk of scandal,

more invitations to compare and contrast CPC "scandals" and Liberal ones (at a time when Canadian's focus on comparisons between the two are becoming more and more stark).

CPC spend their own money and have a dissagreement with EC over accounting,

Libs steal taxpayer money to the tune of $40 MILLION and spend it on themselves, after funnelling it via laundering and brown paper bags full of cash.

The result?

CPC now at 43%.

I say we continue to talk "scandal".

Keith in Brampton

The difference being that NONE of the Adscam people are sitting in the HOC, whereas the people behind the CPC scandals are.

Question, Chet: If you break the law, should your children (or grandchildren) be held accountable?

chet

I suspect most Canadians don't follow "progressive" ground rules, namely:

- you can go back decades to consider a decades old private contract that involved no stolen taxpayer money (Mulroney)
- you can go back 5 plus years to consider an accounting dispute over a party spending it's own money

- but you cannot consider a scandal in which liberals stole $40 MILLION in taxpayer dollars, with it still being in the possession of the theives, being a continuing offence that reoccurs every single day.

Given the polls all continue to trend toward clear majority, I suspect I'm correct that Candians don't follow these groundrules.

http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

Well chet.. considering there aint an election right now.. these arent election results.. I'm not worried. If the Cons think they can win a majority, call an election.

The point is as it stands.. your party has broken the law … and the fact you're defending wrongdoing based on polling is a sad state of affairs.
Dave

What about a scandal in which Conservatives used HUNDREDS of millions for partisan "government advertising", a scandal which continues to unfold daily on TV and radio?

What about that scandal?

When will the Conservatives pay that money back?

http://tiny.cc/CRUSH Nadine Lumley

♥♥♥ We are working hard to get the word out to Canadians about our Crime Minister / Prime Spender Stealin' Harper. ♥♥♥ Google this discussion group of 5,800+ Canadians: (CRUSH) Canadians Rallying to Unseat Steve Harper ♥♥♥ Also we run a website called: unseatHarper dot ca ♥ We talk, share newstories and help each other understand the lies told to us by Harper and the MSM. ♥♥♥ Steve HarperCon: Government of One ♥♥♥