Green Party leader Elizabeth May's short list of election irregularities and crimes

Green Party leader Elizabeth May shows refreshing intellectual alacrity as she cuts through robo rhetoric and ops for a little clarity on election irregularities and crime. The following appeared on her blog yesterday.

By Elizabeth May on 19 March 2012

Lately, a lot of allegations have been made that there were election irregularities and some outright crimes committed in the 2011 election. What we do not know is who was responsible.

But we may be dealing with a serial offender, or offenders. When one thinks about the election skulduggery of the last six years, it is clear that Canada does a poor job of getting to the bottom of some serious crimes.

Here’s a short list of the ones that still bother me. They remain unsolved.

1. RCMP interference in the 2006 election. (Remember Zaccardelli issuing a press release about looking into NDP charges that the Liberals had leaked details about the income trust taxation issue? There was nothing to it, but it arguably changed the outcome of the election. Issuing a press release in an election campaign was a violation of RCMP normal practice.) Naming a Finance Minister in the release was unheard of. The Public Complaints Commission for the RCMP, under its director Paul Kennedy, tried to question former RCMP Commissioner Guiliano Zaccardelli. Zaccardelli refused to be questioned and Kennedy lacked subpoena powers. No one knows if there was any political involvement, inducement or pay-off involved. Zaccardelli is now a senior Interpol officer in Lyon, France.
2. How hard did the Conservatives try to bring down the Martin government in spring 2005? Did the effort include the offer of a million dollar life insurance policy to Chuck Cadman?? It was alleged, there was a tape. What happened to the investigation? If it happened, it was illegal.
3. The Conservative campaign in the Nova Scotia riding of Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley in 2008. Courageous MP Bill Casey had been expelled from the Conservative caucus for voting against the 2008 budget which violated the contract with NS, known as the "Atlantic Accord." In 2008, Casey ran as an Independent. The Conservative Candidate Joel Bernard left Stockwell Day’s office to challenge him. (In an interesting side-bar, the entire Conservative riding association insisted that Bill Casey was their candidate. The Conservative Party fired the whole of the local executive and appointed a secret group to chose their candidate.) Casey was re-elected handily. After the election, Casey learned that Bernard’s campaign had gone to the RCMP and alleged that Casey had embezzled funds from the Conservative riding association. There was no truth to such charges, but it also emerged that efforts had been made to peddle the story to the local media during the election. Media did not cover it because Casey’s reputation for integrity made it too implausible to treat seriously. But making unsubstantiated allegations and wasting RCMP resources were themselves possibly criminal acts. According to Wikipedia, Bernard is now in Industry Minister Tony Clement’s office.
4. In 2008, well-documented robocalls were made into the riding I now hold -- Saanich-Gulf Islands. There are many details of this case in my previous blogs. It was clearly illegal. The automated calls claimed to be from the NDP and demonstrably were not. The home fax line of the NDP riding association president had been "spoofed." (So that his number appeared to be the source of the calls.) Calls were made that urged citizens to vote for the NDP candidate who had withdrawn from the race. The robocalls may well have changed the outcome of the election. Yet, Elections Canada dropped the case and ruled no laws had been broken.
5. Were Larry Smith and Fabian Manning given any promises that if they left the Senate to run for a Commons seat in 2011, and were to lose, they would be re-appointed to the Senate? Both Conservative Senators vied for a seat, one in Montreal, the other in Newfoundland. Both lost and were re-appointed to the Senate within weeks of the May 2, 2011 election. Democracy Watch demanded an investigation as, if such a promise was made, it violated the Criminal Code.

Add these to the spate of calls in 2011 designed to misdirect voters to non-existent polling places, the allegations of a secret Conservative bank account in Vaughn. Add to that the legal, but unethical, use of "voter suppression" techniques – attack ads, writ periods at the legal minimum length, disgusting behaviour in the House of Commons – and you have a toxic recipe for poisoning democracy.

Canadians must not allow allegations of serious election crimes to be swept under the carpet once again. It may that the guilty party is a "win at all costs" attitude; an acceptance of the morally bankrupt idea that anything goes and the only sin is getting caught.

We need to know and we need to stop it.

Canadians want an independent investigation into robocalls, Angus Reid survey suggests

by Bobbie Saga

Most Canadians are calling for an independent investigation into robocalls, with a majority believing they are not isolated incidents limited to the riding of Guelph, a new Angus Reid poll shows.

The online survey, released today, reveals that most Canadians think Robocalls were used broadly in the last federal election, with four-in-five respondents calling for an independent investigation.

The survey shows respondents are divided on what impact robocalls may have had on the last federal ballot, with slightly less than half, or 44 per cent, agreeing that misleading messages definitely changed the outcome of the May 2011 federal election. Only 36 per cent of those polled disagreed that robocalls changed the outcome.

 

But half of those polled, or 50 per cent – including 61 per cent of Quebecers – believe every riding subjected to misleading robocalls should have a by-election as soon as possible. Moreover, four-in-five, or 81 per cent, want an independent investigation to find out exactly who was behind any misleading calls.

A breakdown of the poll, conducted from March 1 to 3, shows most opposition voters believe that robocalls definitely changed the outcome of the last federal ballot, a view shared by just 17 per cent of Conservative voters.

The survey also suggests almost two thirds of Canadians, or 64 per cent of those polled, think the Guelph occurrence is "probably" or "definitely" one of many that took place and where robocalls were a method used widely in the last federal campaign.

As well, 80 per cent of Canadians who voted for the Green Party, 78 per cent for the New Democratic Party, and 77 per cent for both the Liberal Party and the Bloc Québécois believe the robocalls extend beyond Guelph. Only 47 per cent of Conservative Party voters stated they believed the calls are an isolated incident.

Respondents were also asked which of the five major federal parties are likely to provide false and misleading information to voters through telephone calls with pre-recorded messages.

 

Only a third of respondents, or 32 per cent, think the Green Party and 33 per cent the New Democratic Party are "very likely" or "moderately likely" to rely on this tactic. In Quebec, 32 per cent of respondents think the Bloc Québécois is likely to use robocalls with misleading information.

A majority of Canadians, however, believe the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party are most likely to provide false and misleading information to voters through telephone calls. The Liberal Party chalked up 55 per cent on this question, while the Conservative Party came in at 63 per cent. Indeed, two-in-five Canadians, or 39 per cent, think the Tories are "very likely" to rely on this tactic.

Another question put to respondents is that of holding by-elections in affected ridings. At least three-in-five Canadians who voted for any of the four opposition parties currently want to hold by-elections in the ridings that were subjected to misleading robocalls. Only 31 per cent of Tory voters concur.

The survey also shows half of respondents say they have followed stories related to robocalls made during the last federal election campaign "very closely" or "moderately closely."

Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted the online survey among 1,001 randomly selected Canadian adults. The margin of error is 3.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20.