• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

House of Commons Debates VOLUME 148 Ï NUMBER 343 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 42nd PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, October 26, 2018 Speaker: The Honourable Geoff Regan CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 22869 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, October 26, 2018 The House met at 10 a.m. Bill C-76 would do nothing to stop these, effectively laundered, American dollars from being used, as they were in 2015, to work to defeat a Conservative government, or next year, to attempt to re-elect the current Liberal government. In fact, the Canada Revenue Prayer Agency, before the 2015 federal election, had been working to audit 42 registered Canadian charities for political activity. There is research, accumulated by the skilled investigative journalist and GOVERNMENT ORDERS researcher Vivian Krause, that indicates that 41 of the 42 audited charities were not fully compliant with the law and that the CRA Ï (1000) would have recommended that at least five of these so-called charities be disqualified and shut down completely. However, in [English] 2016, the CRA shut down those audits without reporting, ELECTIONS MODERNIZATION ACT coincidentally after the revenue minister was issued a mandate The House resumed from October 24 consideration of Bill C-76, letter that directed her to “Allow charities to do their work...free from An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to political harassment". make certain consequential amendments, as reported (with amend- ments) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1. Ms. Krause testified last week, before the ethics committee, that Hon. Peter Kent (Thornhill, CPC): Madam Speaker, I will pick she spent six months in 2016 writing a report, which she submitted up where I left off before the Liberals imposed a legislative to Elections Canada. Elections Canada sent investigators to guillotine to cut off debate. Vancouver to meet with Ms. Krause, and she testified that after extensive discussion, it became clear to her that Elections Canada My greatest concern about Bill C-76 is the Liberal claim that it cannot do anything if the Canada Revenue Agency allows charities would combat and control third party spending. It would not to Canadianize foreign funds. properly address a problem that could have been easily solved if, and this is a big if, the current Liberal government had actually wanted to The Income Tax Act is very clear that charities are to operate for solve it. purposes that are charitable as defined by law. While charities have been able to get away with it by pointing to language that permits a At first glance, it appears that the legislation might contain foreign limited amount of political activity, the original intent was that the financial interference by setting some spending limits and requiring political activity was intended to further a charitable purpose. If that third parties to have a dedicated Canadian bank account. However, political activity does not support a charitable purpose, the allowable Bill C-76 would double the total maximum third party spending political activity should be, as Ms. Krause pointed out very clearly amount allowed during the writ period, and it would still allow before committee, absolutely zero. unlimited contributions from individual donors and others, unlimited spending by third parties and unlimited foreign donations outside the pre-writ and writ periods. In wrapping up, while there are, admittedly, some modest improvements made to Bill C-76, it remains a deeply deficient Some of our Liberal colleagues claim that foreign financial attempt to restore fairness to the Canadian election process. It is a interference has been adequately blocked, but the reality is that a testament to the current Liberal government's deliberate decision, as huge loophole, exploited in recent elections with increasingly larger with Bill C-50 before it, to leave loopholes the Liberals believe will amounts of foreign funding of third parties, still exists. Foreign enhance their efforts to save their political skin in 2019. charities, such as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund in New York or the American Tides Foundation in San Francisco, can give millions of Ï (1005) foreign dollars to Canadian charities such as the Tides Canada organization, Leadnow, the Dogwood Initiative or the Sisu Institute, Mrs. Bernadette Jordan (Parliamentary Secretary to the and those millions can be disbursed as Canadian dollars to third- Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I party groups to support parties and candidates of their choice and to thank my colleague for his comments today on Bill C-76, a bill we oppose parties and candidates of their choice. Elections Canada can think will strengthen the ability of Canadians to vote that was taken do nothing without new legislation. away by the party opposite. 22870 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 2018 Government Orders One of the amendments that was accepted at committee was to dozen, that electoral activity in Canada, particularly activity by third add additional punishments for third parties that are found guilty of parties in elections, be brought under the purview of the Privacy offences related to the use of foreign funds. It is interesting that the Commissioner, not for the Privacy Commissioner to regulate or Conservatives are saying that we are not doing enough, but they interfere with political activity by political parties but to protect the voted against that in committee. This was an amendment put forward privacy of Canadians from third-party interference and attempts to by the hon. member for Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame. It is manipulate and contort the election results. also one supported by Senator Frum in her legislation. However, the Conservatives felt that they had to vote against it. [Translation] Did Conservatives vote against it because it was put forward by a Liberal, or did they vote against it because it strengthened the Mr. Randy Boissonnault (Edmonton Centre, Lib.): Madam legislation? Speaker, the Government of Canada has heard what Canadians have Hon. Peter Kent: Madam Speaker, that was a deflecting question. to say. I believe the larger question comes back to the fact that the government, in its mandate letter to the Minister of National We are very proud that the majority of the all-party amendments to Revenue, gave her pretty clear direction on the CRA audit of the bill are among the amendments the committee adopted. questionable Canadian charities that were Canadianizing American charitable dollars to be used by third parties. The donors of these [English] original American dollars basically bragged that they were sending them to Canada to be used to defeat the sitting Conservative government. When the bill was introduced, the Government of Canada introduced it as an initiative to modernize our electoral process That is the larger issue we are addressing here today. The fact is and make it more transparent, accessible and secure for all that Elections Canada should have been enabled by this deficient Canadians. One of the proposed amendments was to require all legislation, Bill C-76, to allow, and to ask, the Canada Revenue electors to be Canadian citizens when exercising their right to vote. Agency to make clear exactly where the money trail leads, from American dollars through American charitable agencies to Canadian charitable agencies, and then disbursed to third parties. Third parties, [Translation] as Ms. Krause reminded us, can throw mud in an election campaign while the party, the Liberal Party in this case, can claim to take the Even though that has always been a requirement for eligibility to high road. vote, Bill C-76 revealed an error in the wording of the new Canada Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): Madam Elections Act, which came into force in 2000. Speaker, I have been sitting with my hon. colleague at the ethics committee, where we have been studying the ability of third party operators to monkeywrench the electoral process. It was possible to interpret the French version of the act as stating that a person who expected to obtain Canadian citizenship prior to We see that Europe is warning of a digital electoral arms race. We voting day could vote in an advance poll before being granted have seen the effects of Brexit and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, citizenship. Of course, there is no way to know for sure that a person yet the government has refused to take the all-party consensus will become a Canadian citizen until that person has taken the oath regarding the necessity of putting political parties under a credible of citizenship. privacy regime to limit the potential of political parties to use the new dark arts of the digital manipulation of voters. [English] What does my hon. colleague think about the credibility of the Liberal government's supposed electoral reform if it is ignoring all- party consensus on the need to have political parties accountable, as The amendments made by the committee to Bill C-76 correct this well, in protecting data and making sure that we are not manipulating error and clarify that only Canadians can cast a ballot in a ballot box. voters through the kind of monkeywrenching that went on in the This would help ensure the integrity of the entire electoral process. Cambridge Analytica scandal? Ï (1010) Former chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand has applauded the Hon. Peter Kent: Madam Speaker, it has indeed been a pleasure Government of Canada's efforts to modernize our electoral system to work with my hon. colleague in these recent months on the ethics and make it more accessible. However, he also mentioned that committee on the study of Cambridge Analytica and AggregateIQ additional amendments should be made to facilitate the identification here in Canada, which revealed the huge vulnerability of the of electors who live in seniors residences or in long-term care Canadian democratic electoral process through new media.

Load more

  40

Copy Link