Just ask

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 11:30 AM - 0 Comments

Ilona Dougherty argues that civics classes aren’t the answer and again stresses the need to actively court young voters the way other age groups are courted.

So what does work? The answer is simple: Ask young people to vote. Elections Canada’s survey results show that young people who were contacted by a political party were significantly more likely to cast a ballot than those who weren’t (83 per cent versus 68 per cent). Having a parent, friend, or roommate who talks about politics also makes young person more likely to participate. There are dozens of rigorous field experiments that reinforce the same basic conclusion: if you ask them, they will vote.

This type of active mobilization is important because young Canadians are currently the group least likely to be solicited: only 40 per cent of them were contacted in any way by a party or candidate during the last federal election. Changing that is a crucial part of any comprehensive strategy, and that means changing what political parties, NGOs, and community organizations do in order to mobilize young voters.

The kids are, you know, fine and stuff, I guess

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, November 28, 2011 at 9:00 AM - 0 Comments

Elections Canada has released its national survey of young adults. Three-quarters of them claim to be voting and they generally seem okay with the state of things.

There were reasonably high levels of satisfaction among the youth surveyed with the way democracy works in Canada, with 53% of youth being somewhat satisfied and a further 17% very satisfied. … A key difference between voters and non-voters was that voters were more likely to have agreed that the government plays a major role in their lives compared to non-voters (81% versus 62%, respectively).

Youth voters were more likely than non-voters to identify with a political party and to feel that by voting they could make a difference. Nearly all voters (95%) agreed that there was at least one political party that talked about the issues that they felt were important, compared to fewer (85%), but still a high proportion, of non-voters. When youth were asked whether they felt that by voting they could make a difference, 88% of voters agreed, compared to 72% of non-voters. Most youth, both voters and non-voters, disagreed that all federal political parties were the same (85% of voters and 76% of non-voters).

Setting aside the obviously dubious self-reporting of voter turnout, the report gets at what’s driving the decline in voter turnout: lack of knowledge, lack of interest, lack of relevance and, as Apathy is Boring has argued, a lack of direct engagement.

Innocent until, and even after, proven guilty

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 11:01 AM - 0 Comments

New Democrat MP Mathieu Ravignat asked yesterday whether the government would be pursuing the Conservative Party of Canada for the rebates it received as part of the In-and-Out scheme. Pierre Poilievre answered for the government.

Mr. Speaker, I thought the honourable member was rising today to apologize on behalf of the NDP. Just last week the NDP had to admit that it broke the Canadian election law, that it violated the law in attempting to use the power of the political donation tax credit in order to fund a third party organization. It did so in violation of the law. It has now had to admit it. On this side of the House, every single Conservative accused of wrongdoing has now been cleared. We are very pleased with the outcome. We will continue to stand by the fact that we followed all the rules.

In the case of the NDP’s violation—offering the party as a conduit for donations to the Broadbent Institute in Jack Layton’s memory—the commissioner of Elections Canada has confirmed that all improper donations were returned by the party.

Outstanding balance

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 11:32 AM - 0 Comments

Glen McGregor wonders if the Conservatives will refund the $187,298 they were reimbursed as a result of the In-and-Out scheme.

Elections Canada says none of the 17 have returned their reimbursements.  Asked if it will take steps to recover the money,  Elections Canada spokesperson Diane Benson said, “We would follow the normal administrative process for the recovery of any debt owed to the Crown.”

Conservative Party spokesman Fred DeLorey responded in an email,  ”The question of reimbursements will be dealt with in the ongoing civil proceedings.” By that, he means the case the Tories brought against Elections Canada, which will be heard in the Supreme Court of Canada.

In and out and settled?

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 1:17 PM - 0 Comments

(This post last updated at 8:24pm.)

Both the Ottawa Citizen and CTV are reporting word of a settlement in the in-and-out case, possibly in relation to the charges against four Conservative party officials. Full history of the in-and-out controversy here.

Update 1:18pm. Canadian Press has details.

The party is set to agree to what a caucus source called “administrative imperfection” for the way it handled advertising spending during the 2006 federal election. As a result, sources say charges against four senior Conservative officials – including two senators – for breaking the Elections Act are being dropped.

Update 1:24pm. Glen McGregor’s FAQ is probably the easiest way to get up to speed. Last March, the House passed a motion deeming the financing scheme to be “an act of electoral fraud.” Three years ago, chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand explained his view in detail before a parliamentary committee.

Update 2:46pm. The Globe confirms.

In return, the Conservative Party of Canada and its fundraising arm are pleading guilty to lesser charges that characterize what took place as a mere error instead of intentional misconduct. At the same time, the charges against four Conservative officials – two sitting senators – are being dropped.

CTV reports the party has been fined $50,000. The Supreme Court will still apparently hear the separate dispute between the Conservative party and Elections Canada.

Update 3:24pm. A statement from Elections Canada. Continue…

Good news, bad news: July 8 – July 14, 2011

By macleans.ca - Monday, July 18, 2011 at 10:50 AM - 0 Comments

Good news

Citizens wave the flag of the newly formed Republic of South Sudan. (Barbara Davidson/Los Angeles Times/Polaris)

Tough love

The U.S. finally took a firm stand on Pakistan by suspending $800 million of the more than $2 billion in aid it offers the country each year. Pakistan has been, at best, an unreliable ally in the war on terror. It recently arrested a number of CIA informants who helped locate Osama bin Laden within its borders and cut visas for U.S. personnel operating near the Afghan border. Pakistan may not always see eye to eye with the U.S., but the fact is that American aid is what keeps its military and, lately, economy afloat. This warning shot should provide a crucial dose of reality.

Happy days, here again

A new quarterly Bank of Canada survey suggests a record 57 per cent of businesses “across all regions and sectors” will hire new employees over the next year (the highest level reported since 2005), while only four per cent expect to reduce staff. This coincides with a Statistics Canada report showing solid job growth for the third straight month, with a net gain of 28,000 jobs in June. That’s in sharp contrast to the U.S., where only 18,000 jobs were gained last month.

Continue…

Two recounts

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 3, 2011 at 12:12 PM - 4 Comments

There will be two automatic recounts—in Etobicoke Centre where the Conservative candidate beat a Liberal incumbent by 26 votes and in Nipissing-Timiskaming where the Conservative candidate beat a Liberal incumbent by 14 votes.

The early returns

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, April 27, 2011 at 9:01 AM - 12 Comments

Elections Canada reports on the turnout at last weekend’s advance polls.

According to the preliminary figures, 2,056,001 electors voted at the advance polls in this federal general election. This is a 34.5% increase from the 1,528,780 electors who voted in advance in the 40th general election in 2008. Over 676,000 Canadians voted on Friday and over 823,000 on Monday, representing the two (2) busiest days of advance voting ever.

Get out the vote

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, April 22, 2011 at 12:43 PM - 7 Comments

Those who are keen to cast a ballot or who won’t be in their riding on election day, can vote this weekend at advance polls.

Elections Canada has all the relevant information.

Voter engagement (III)

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, April 15, 2011 at 2:29 PM - 96 Comments

While clarifying the parameters around special ballot voting, Elections Canada has ruled that the votes cast in Guelph will be counted.

While the initiative at the University of Guelph was not pre-authorized by the Chief Electoral Officer, the Canada Elections Act provides that electors may apply for and vote by special ballot. A special ballot coordinator, appointed by the local returning officer, oversaw the activities at the University of Guelph. All information at our disposal indicates that the votes were cast in a manner that respects the Canada Elections Act and are valid.

Whatever the allegations of attempt ballot box interference, the Conservative campaign says it’s happy the students will not be disenfranchised.

Voter engagement (II)

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, April 15, 2011 at 10:41 AM - 144 Comments

The Conservative campaign has issued the following statement.

The Conservative Party encourages all Canadians to exercise their democratic right to vote. In fact, we are taking unprecedented steps to ensure that all Canadians are aware of the many ways in which they can vote, including voting by special ballot at or through returning offices.

Voting is a democratic right. A fair election process is an equally important democratic right. All Canadians want the election rules to be followed and to be enforced the same everywhere.

On April 13, representatives of the Marty Burke campaign attended at a polling station set up by the Returning Officer for Guelph.

The local campaign was denied the right to have its identified scrutineer observe the process – a denial of a basic electoral right. The local campaign also noticed that Liberal material was present in the polling area – a clear breach of the rules.

Continue…

The official explanation

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, March 9, 2011 at 1:49 PM - 239 Comments

When chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand testified before the ethics committee three years ago, he explained his decision on the Conservative in-and-out transactions as the result of five factors.

There was no single deciding factor leading to my decision. In fact, rather, it was an aggregate of factors that precluded me from being satisfied that this expense was an election expense warranting a reimbursement. In addition to the statement by an official agent to which I have already referred, other statements were made by other official agents or candidates also disclosing a lack of detail and knowledge of the regional media buy expense.

Continue…

The Commons: Stephen Harper, ever undaunted

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 6:34 PM - 222 Comments

The Scene. Mr. Harper’s government, as the government of Canada is now to be known, stands accused of various breaches. Of violating electoral law when it won office. Of withholding information demanded of it by Parliament. Of employing a minister who has misled Parliament. Of employing a minister who has misused government resources for his party’s gain. Of paying an exorbitant amount of money to disappear a woman who once held the title of “integrity commissioner.” And yes, of renaming the federal government in the Prime Minister’s own surname.

And so, of course, the government side this afternoon was as gleeful and aggressive as it has ever been. It roared and cheered and mocked and jeered. It laughed and lashed at its critics, it delighted in itself. It was loud and proud.

Mr. Harper sat and smiled and shared the odd chuckle. He reclined as best he could in his chair and fiddled with the cord of his desk’s earpiece. When he stood to answer the Liberal leader’s charges, he shrugged and sighed. If he was the least bit concerned, a tiny bit chastened, it was impossible to tell.

But, of course, he hardly ever appears daunted by such stuff. Indeed, if there is one thing that defines this Prime Minister it is his unrelenting undauntedness, his undaunting relentlessness. He is a man of the post-shame world. Continue…

Money goes in, money goes out

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 1:24 PM - 125 Comments

The CBC looks at how in-and-out impacted public reimbursements.

Another riding that appears to have received some of that money is the Conservative riding association in Hull-Aylmer, Que. That association spent only about $12,000 of its own money in the 2006 election, according to numbers from Elections Canada, but received almost $34,000 in reimbursements because of the “in-and-out” tactic.

In-and-Out FAQ

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, March 4, 2011 at 2:17 PM - 128 Comments

Glen McGregor answers all your in-and-out questions.

Didn’t the other parties do the same thing?
Not according to the CEOC. The major parties all transfer money back and forth between their national campaign and candidate campaigns, and between candidate campaigns. Some parties’ candidates have also participated in pooled media buys — typically, a group of candidates in nearby ridings buy an ad together and share the costs. The CEOC maintains this is fundamentally different because these candidates legitimately incurred the costs of the ads, whereas the cost of the ads claimed by the Conservatives candidates were incurred by the party.

'To think that we live in this country in which our government behaves in such a manner'

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 at 9:01 AM - 70 Comments

Jennifer Ditchburn talks to the Conservative candidate who refused to go along with the party’s in-and-out financing.

“It always seemed to me that the in-and-out was irregular and illegal,” Marler said in an interview.”It is gratifying to note that the Federal Court (of Appeal) has come to the same opinion, which always seemed to me to be obvious. I think they’re doing the right thing by prosecuting the alleged offenders.”

More on yesterday’s ruling from the Canadian Press, Star and Citizen. Greg Weston reviews how we got here.

The Commons: To stand and say something

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 6:47 PM - 57 Comments

The Scene. The public undermining of the Honourable Beverley J. Oda’s professional standing continues at a methodical pace.

The opposition side is now engaged in unabashed mockery for the still-seated minister. “How can she remain in her position as minister when, by her silence, she refuses to be accountable to Parliament?” asked Liberal Hedy Fry after quoting from the Prime Minister’s own guidelines on ministerial accountability.

John Baird stood to take this one and so Ms. Fry upped the rhetorical ante. “The Minister of International Cooperation sits behind the Prime Minister, dutifully, day after day and is not allowed to answer,” she observed. “Is it this Prime Minister’s position that women in his cabinet should only be seen and not heard?”

This was enough to receive an admonishment from Mr. Baird, but not enough to get Ms. Oda on her feet. The Liberals pursued her twice more, but Mr. Baird stood for those as well. The Liberals jeered and yelled. They chanted “Let her speak” and thumped their desks. Ms. Oda sat quietly. Mr. Baird turned at one point to acknowledge her presence directly as he commended her “great leadership.” This earned her an ovation from the Conservative side and a pat on the back from Sylvie Boucher seated behind her.

On some antiquated principle of parliamentary democracy and representative government, the Liberals are probably correct to wonder why the minister does not stand in her place to respond to opposition queries and condemnations during the time allotted each day for the House to hear such things. But implicit in that is the assumption that her standing will serve some purpose beyond confirming her ability to perform the physical act itself. Continue…

Meanwhile, at the Federal Court of Appeal

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 4:23 PM - 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.

'Bend the rules, you will be punished'

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, February 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM - 71 Comments

As Bruce Cheadle notes, the in-and-out charges will be pursued by the public prosecutor’s office.

Dan Brien, spokesman for the public prosecutor’s office, said a team reviewed all the evidence gathered by Elections commissioner William Corbett and decided summary charges, rather than criminal indictments, were the way to proceed. “It’s a Crown decision,” said Brien…

The role of the public prosecutor, an innovation brought in by the Harper government as part of the Accountability Act, is to remove any cloud of political interference from the legal system. ”There’s going to be a new code on Parliament Hill,” Harper said as he introduced the public prosecutor model during that hotly contested 2006 election campaign. ”Bend the rules, you will be punished; break the law, you will be charged; abuse the public trust, you will go to prison.”

The charges

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, February 25, 2011 at 9:38 AM - 32 Comments

Elections Canada has now issued a short statement, including the official charges.

The charges were officially laid by the Commissioner of Canada Elections William Corbett. More on previous sentences and compliance agreements here.

Charges laid

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 10:41 PM - 145 Comments

An anonymous Conservative official tells the CBC, Postmedia, CTV and the Star, that four party officials have been charged by Elections Canada in connection with in-and-out campaign financing: Doug Finley, Irving Gerstein, Michael Donison and Susan Kehoe.

More background from Pundits Guide here and here. Kady O’Malley has the official Conservative talking points on this “long-running accounting dispute.”

'We are all proud to share basic principles'

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, February 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM - 91 Comments

Conservative backbencher Steven Blaney—with the public support of Immigration Minister Jason Kenney—has introduced a bill that would ban so-called “veiled voters.”

Blaney said it’s not an issue of religion. ”I think we are all proud to live in this country,” he said. “We are all proud to share basic principles… one of those basic principles is transparency through our democratic process.”

The government side has known since 2007—after some schooling from commissioner Marc Mayrand—that the current electoral law does not include an absolute demand on visual identification before voting. In 2009, the government abandoned plans to change that. At that time, Elections Canada noted that the apparent problem had not resulted in any apparent issues during the 2008 general election. Continue…

The In-and-Out election

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, December 13, 2010 at 1:49 PM - 73 Comments

The 2006 election campaign that brought Stephen Harper to power on a promise of new accountability continues to raise questions of accounting.

The Canadian Press has learned that chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand has taken the governing party to task for failing to properly report the cost of running two regional campaign offices in Quebec. The $107,000 tab was divvied up and claimed as a shared expense by 15 candidates in Montreal and Quebec City. They claimed the expense even though Elections Canada found many candidates never used the regional offices, which were staffed by central party workers involved in what appear to have been national campaign activities.

Pundits Guide has more.

Idea alert

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 9:18 AM - 0 Comments

The Green party wants to ban political advertising from television.

Many countries ban the use of television advertising for political parties, including the U.K., South Africa, Brazil, Belgium, Switzerland, Chile, Sweden, and Ireland. Attack ads are widely recognized to discourage democratic participation and cost an incredible amount of money, creating an enormous imbalance between the different parties.

In order to have open, fair and participatory election campaigns, Canada should ban the use of television for political advertising before and during the writ periods. Current Elections Canada rules limit political party spending on television ads during a writ period, but there are no controls at all on television ads outside a writ period. “We should rely on free access to the airwaves, organized by networks to allow candidates to explain their own views and policies, not attack the character and personal foibles of the opposition,” said May.

Elizabeth May expands on her concerns here.