Monthly Archives: April 2014

Election Fraud, Robo Call

3 roadblocks to the robocalls probe — and their possible fixes Fair Elections Act makes robocalls, live campaign calls more traceable By Laura Payton, CBC News

Leave a comment

Investigators ran into a series of problems in trying to probe allegations of misleading or nuisance calls across Canada in 2011. The fair elections act pitches ways to fix one of them, but leaves out a number of others.

Investigators ran into a series of problems in trying to probe allegations of misleading or nuisance calls across Canada in 2011. The fair elections act pitches ways to fix one of them, but leaves out a number of others. (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)

Investigators ran into a series of problems in trying to probe what came to be known as robocalls, allegations of misleading or nuisance calls across Canada in the 2011 federal election.

In a report released Thursday, Yves Côté, the commissioner of Canada Elections, said no charges would be laid following complaints ofmisleading or nuisance live calls and robocalls. He noted a number of problems that limited the ability to investigate the complaints.

In the end, it was difficult to sort out the legitimate calls made to encourage people to vote, or to vote for a specific party, from the calls alleged to be misleading or harassing.

The fair elections act would bring in some improvements, but leaves out a number of others. Here are three problems identified by investigators and how they may — or may not — be fixed under Bill C-23.

1. Limited information

National parties don’t have to submit receipts and other documents to back up the expenses they claim for reimbursement from Elections Canada, so investigators didn’t have access to contractual information between the national campaigns and telemarketing companies used to make the calls.

“The challenge lies in the limited information that must be provided to Elections Canada,” the report said.

Candidates do have to submit supporting documents, but, the report noted, “the purpose for which a firm was retained, the phone numbers called, and the text of any calls made is not reported.”

The Fair Elections Act would force the companies to keep scripts of live calls and recordings of robocalls, but parties still won’t have to submit any records to back up their expense claims. Elections Canada officials have for years called for the ability to acquire those records, particularly because parties get 50 per cent of their spending reimbursed.

While the bill says the scripts and live calls will have to be held for a year, Minister of State for Democratic Reform Pierre Poilievre said Friday that he is asking for the bill to be amended to have the records held for three years.

2. Inability to compel witnesses

Elections Canada officials have asked repeatedly for the ability to go to a court and ask a judge to compel oral evidence from witnesses.

Côté’s report notes that limitation, combined with the difficulty in getting production orders without significant progress in an investigation, made the robocalls probe harder.

“After a certain point, investigators had to rely on the voluntary participation of any concerned entity or person to obtain relevant information,” the report said.

Marc Mayrand, the chief electoral officer, says many other regulatory agencies have that power, as well as provincial electoral agencies. Poilievre says police don’t have that power and he isn’t about to give it to Elections Canada.

“It’s reasonable to expect that he [the commissioner] go to a judge and seek a court order to produce documents,” Poilievre said. “That’s what judges do… but I don’t think that it’s fair to give an election investigator powers that are not even available to police officers who are investigating the most violent and serious of crimes.”

3. Robocall records

“There are no binding industry standards for the creation and retention of records by telephone service providers and telemarketing companies,” Côté said in his report.

In the case of the complaints following the 2011 election, media reports the next year drew attention to the problem and elicited thousands of complaints. The vast majority of those complaints came nine months later, making the investigation harder.

The proposed bill will force the companies that provide calls to register with the CRTC, and Poilievre’s new amendments will have them keep script and call recordings for three years. But they still won’t have to keep the lists of phone numbers called, which would give investigators an additional avenue to pursue if new allegations surface in the future.

The investigators also pointed to technological challenges that allow callers to mask their phone numbers to prevent being traced.

Canadian Politics

Feds not out of options on Senate reform, Senator Segal says

Leave a comment

OTTAWA — Although the Harper government seemed to shrug its shoulders and move on following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Senate, it is by no means out of options, said one Conservative senator.

“I would … make the case that there are still changes that could be made,” Senator Hugh Segal said in an interview on The West Block with Tom Clark. “There could be a new approach to how you appoint, on a consultative basis.”

On Friday, the Supreme Court shot down Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s plans toreform the upper chamber, which has been plagued with scandal.

In a historic, unanimous decision, the top court advised that the prime minister’s proposals to impose term limits on senators and create a “consultative election” process to choose nominees cannot be done by the federal government alone.

Instead, the court ruled, those reforms would require constitutional amendments signed off by at least seven provinces representing 50 per cent of the nation’s population. That, however, would set the country down a path peppered with political landmines — a route Harper was hoping to avoid.

The court went even further on the idea of abolishing the Senate, deciding that move, which Harper said he would take should he be unable to reform the upper chamber, would require unanimous consent of all 10 provinces.

So as the Conservative government sees it, its hands are tied.

WATCH: Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre says the government is out of options when it comes to reforming the Senate, and explains why the government decided to make amendments to the Fair Elections Act.

“The court has made Senate reform by Parliament impossible,” Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre said in an interview Sunday. “So at this point we’re going to do what we can to limit the cost and maximize the accountability of the Senate within the existing constitutional framework that the court has laid out.”

Senate reform has long been a priority for the Conservatives. But with last week’s ruling, it seems they’re prepared to move on.

Poilievre dismissed the notion of the government sitting down with the provincial premiers to see if they could get on board with the proposed reforms.

“I just think this time, the Canadian people are focussed on the economy,” he said when asked whether that was an option. “Our government is focused on jobs growth and lower taxes, and we don’t want to distract from that agenda by having a complicated constitutional wrangling with politicians at other levels of government.”

Senator Segal credited the government for respecting the Supreme Court’s decision, but argued there still are options.

He gave the example of the British House of Lords, upon which the Senate is based, where no government has a working majority.

“The mix of people appointed from the various political parties and as crossbenchers who come because they bring a particular expertise and science, or technology, or the military, or the church, or whatever, is such that the body can never be controlled by any one political party,” Segal said. “These are changes that could be made and require no constitutional revision at all.”

– With files from The Canadian Press

© Shaw Media, 2014