80%+ voters want “dirty dozen” secret lobbying loopholes closed — loopholes facilitate foreign interference

80%+ voters also want loopholes in lobbying code closed to stop unethical favour-trading between lobbyists and politicians

Commissioner and RCMP have let off 99.9% of violations of lobbying law and code in secret rulings without the lobbyist being identified or penalized

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Monday, June 8, 2026

OTTAWA – Late this afternoon, Democracy Watch Co-founder Duff Conacher will testify at a hearing of the House Ethics Committee as it continues its nine-year overdue review of the federal Lobbying Act.  DWatch will call on the Committee to recommend key changes to close huge loopholes in the Act and the Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct that allow for secret, unethical lobbying, and key changes to ensure independent, timely, transparent, effective and accountable enforcement by the Commissioner of Lobbying and RCMP, both of which have negligently bad enforcement records.

There are a “dirty dozen” secret lobbying loopholes in the Act, and four unethical lobbying loopholes in the Code that were added by Commissioner of Lobbying Nancy Bélanger and the Ethics Committee in July 2023.

The secrecy loopholes allow for lobbying mainly by big businesses that is not required to be disclosed in the federal Registry of Lobbyists if: the lobbyist is not paid to lobby; is lobbying about enforcement of a law or regulation or for a tax credit; is an employee lobbying less than 8 hours a month; or is lobbying a political party official.  Most lobbying communications are also not required to be disclosed in the Registry. The secrecy loopholes also facilitate foreign interference in federal politics.

Unregistered lobbyists are not required to comply with the few ethics rules in the Code.  The secret lobbying loopholes also allow politicians to leave office and start doing unregistered lobbying right away.  The so-called five-year ban on lobbying after leaving your position only applies to lobbying that is required to be registered under the Act.

The unethical lobbying loopholes in the Code allow registered lobbyists to secretly fundraise and campaign for party leaders, politicians and parties, and assist them in other ways and give them gifts, while lobbying them at the same time or soon afterwards.  Lobbyists are also allowed to lobby for conflicting interests, and to use secret information obtained from public officials.

A national survey that Democracy Watch commissioned from Nanos Research in January 2025 showed more than 80% of Canadians want to know about all lobbying activities, and are concerned about the corrupting effects of secret, unethical lobbying on politicians’ policy-making decisions.

More than 40 lawyers and professors, many of them leading experts in government ethics, and 26 citizen groups with a total membership of 1.5 million Canadians, and more than 20,000 voters who signed on to Democracy Watch’s petition on Change.org or its letter-writing campaign, have called on federal parties to reverse the gutting of the Lobbyists’ Code so that lobbyists would again be prohibited from assisting politicians and lobbying them at the same time or soon afterwards.

“It’s outrageous that MPs from all parties have for decades left open loopholes in the federal lobbying law that allow for secret lobbying, and that they all worked with the Commissioner of Lobbying to create new loopholes to allow lobbyists to essentially secretly bribe federal politicians with fundraising, working on campaigns and other favours,” said Conacher.  “The committee must call for changes to close all of these loopholes to stop the secret, corrupt favour-trading between lobbyists and politicians that is currently legal and that taints every federal policy-making and government spending process.”

The loopholes, combined with the negligently bad enforcement record  Commissioner Bélanger and the RCMP, make the federal lobbying law and code a sad joke.  They have let off 99.9% of violations of lobbying law and code in secret rulings without the lobbyist being identified or penalized.

Commissioner Bélanger’s and the RCMP’s horrible enforcement record makes it clear that many changes are needed to the Act to require them to enforce the Act and Code strictly, strongly, effectively and transparently.  The Commissioner must be chosen through an independent process, not through the current ruling party Cabinet-controlled process that the Federal Court of Appeal has ruled is biased, with no possibility of re-appointment for a second term.

The Commissioner must also be required to conduct regular audits, and to issue a public ruling and impose a penalty for all violations, and the public must be given the right to challenge the Commissioner in court for failing to enforce the Act or Code properly.

“The rules in every law and code are just words on paper until they are enforced effectively, and the Commissioner of Lobbying and RCMP have completely failed for decades to enforce the federal lobbying law and code, and their negligently bad enforcement record has encouraged secret, unethical lobbying that corrupts every federal policy-making and government spending process,” said Conacher.  “The media, and the public, often look for examples of what politicians are doing for lobbyists in return for the favours lobbyists do for politicians, but they should realize that lobbyists often want politicians to return their favours by doing nothing – by not regulating big businesses, not protecting consumers, workers or the environment, not cutting business subsidies and tax credits, and not taxing them.”

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Secret, Unethical Lobbying Campaign, Stop Foreign Interference in Canadian Politics Campaign and Stop Bad Government Appointments Campaign

As a result, Bill C-25, and Canada’s election law, still allow one voter to spend millions influencing a federal election, mostly in secret

Foreign “proxies” and wealthy Canadians and lobbyists also still allowed to spend unlimited funds in secret in nomination and party leadership contests, including on disinformation campaigns, and to hide their funders, and to fundraise in secret, and high donation limits make it easy to funnel big money into the political system

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, June 4, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch criticized Liberal MPs on the House Procedure and House Affairs Committee for voting against key changes (on May 28 or June 2) proposed by opposition MPs to Bill C-25, which changes Canada’s federal election law.  The changes are needed to close the huge loopholes in the law that allow for secret, undemocratic and unethical spending, fundraising, donations, loans, and disinformation campaigns by wealthy Canadians, lobbyists and front groups funded by foreign governments, businesses and other organizations.

Democracy Watch Co-founder Duff Conacher testified before the Committee on May 26th and filed a list of 20 key changes needed to the Bill.

Only Liberal MPs on the Committee voted against the following change proposed by Conservative MP Michael Cooper:

1. To require all “third party” interest groups to track and disclose the source of the funds they spend to influence elections and by-elections (clauses 19 and 23 of Bill C-25).

Only Liberal MPs on the Committee voted against the following changes proposed by NDP MP Don Davies:

1. To require the date and time of regulated fundraising events to be published in advance (clause 28);

2. To require the postal code of a regulated fundraising event to be published after the event (clause 29);

3. To require parties to return donations made at fundraising events that are not publicly reported as required by the Canada Elections Act (CEA) (clause 30), and;

4. To retain several measures in the CEA that make it a violation for various people and entities to fail to disclose a public report providing details about a regulated fundraising event (clause 61).

As a result of the Mark Carney Liberal government proposing a loophole-filled Bill C-25, and Liberal MPs voting against the above changes to Bill C-25, Canada’s election law (the CEA) continues to allow the following secret, undemocratic, unethical activities, either legally or effectively:

•  One voter will still be allowed to spend millions influencing a federal election, mostly in secret;

•  Foreign front group “proxies” and wealthy Canadian voters and interest groups (“third parties”) will still be allowed to spend unlimited funds in secret to influence nomination and party leadership contests (unlike in the U.S.);

•  Everyone, especially foreigners, will still be allowed to mislead voters with disinformation campaigns making false claims about any issue, and making many false claims about party leaders and candidates;

•  Foreign front “proxies” and “third parties” (Canadian voters and interest groups) will still be allowed to hide their funders (unlike in the U.S.);

•  Everyone (including lobbyists for big businesses, unions and other organizations) will still be allowed to secretly fundraise, campaign and do other secret favours for parties, party leaders, riding associations, candidates and nomination and party leadership contestants, and;

•  Everyone will still be allowed to funnel big money amounts into the federal political system because of the much-too-high annual federal donation and loan limit.

Among the 20 key changes Democracy Watch called on the Committee to make to Bill C-25 are the following overall sets of changes:

1. Prohibit all false claims made by anyone at any time anywhere about elections and other processes in Canada, including false election promises by parties and party leaders.

2. Prohibit the publishing of survey results in the few days before the election, given how easy it is to mislead voters with an invalid survey.

3. Prohibit foreign influence activities that are currently legal.

4. Prohibit foreigners and people under age 18 from voting in nomination and party leadership contests.

5. Require public disclosure of staff, top-level volunteers and campaigners, fundraisers (and amounts raised and how) by nomination and party leadership contestants, candidates, riding associations and parties, and disclosure of all volunteers to Elections Canada.

6. Require all third parties to register and disclose all their donors and spending if they spend more than $100 during a nomination contest, party leadership contest, or during a pre-election period, election period or policy-making process, including trying to influence political party officials, and prohibit them from colluding with contestants.

7. Only allow a third-party individual to spend $100, and citizen groups to spend an amount based on how many voters actually support them, and prohibit business “third parties” from spending at all, during contests, elections and policy-making processes.

“Bill C-25 proposes some ineffective half-measures that won’t stop the undemocratic influence of wealthy interests, disinformation or foreign interference on Canada’s elections, and Liberal MPs on the committee voted against all the changes proposed by opposition MP to strengthen many measures and make other key changes to close many other huge, unethical and undemocratic loopholes in Canada’s election law,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “The Liberals’ Bill C-25 also proposes to add a loophole to the law that will make it essentially impossible to determine if a lobbyist or someone who wants something from politicians is helping organize or holding a fundraising event for a party, riding association or candidate, and that secrecy is a recipe for corruption, waste of the public’s money and other abuses.”

“The only way to stop foreign big money from flowing into Canada’s political finance system is to stop big money donations and loans,” said Conacher.  “As long as big money donations and loans are allowed, it will be easy for foreign governments, businesses and organizations to funnel large amounts of money secretly to nomination and party leadership contestants, election candidates, riding associations and parties.”

“Loopholes in key laws mean third-party businesses, organizations and individuals are currently allowed to spend an unlimited amount of money in secret supporting or opposing nomination and party leadership contestants, to hide the identity of their funders, and to lobby Cabinet ministers, government officials, politicians and political party officials in secret, unethical ways,” said Conacher.  “These loopholes must be closed or third parties will continue to be used as fronts for foreign governments and entities to interfere in and influence Canadian elections and government policy-making processes in secret, unethical and undemocratic ways.”

Liberal and Conservative MPs on the Committee also voted against the following changes proposed by Bloc MP Christine Normandin:

1. To Bill C-25 reduce the annual donation limit to each party to $500, and to each parties’ riding associations to $500, and to party leadership contestants to $1,000 (clause 25.1);

(NOTE: Another change proposed by MP Normandin, to cancel the current tax rebate for political donations, which mostly goes to wealthy donors, and use the money to restore per-vote quarterly public funding for the parties, was ruled out of order by the Liberal MP who chairs the Committee (clause 35.1)).

The loopholes in other key laws that need to be closed to ensure fair, democratic, ethical elections, and to stop foreign interference, are set out in Democracy Watch’s final submission to the Hogue Inquiry (Click here to see details), including:

1. Prohibit anonymous social media accounts and Internet sites, and bots.

2. Prohibit media and social media outlets from allowing posts with false claims, including fake videos and audio files.

3. Have complaints about disinformation go to federal agencies, boards, commissions and tribunals (ABCTs) that already have expertise in various issue areas.

4. Empower the ABCTs to order Internet and social media companies to remove false posts and webpages, and to block sites that refuse to remove or prevent false claims from being posted on their site.

5. Empower the ABCTs to penalize misleaders and misleading social media companies and websites with significant fines.

6. Make all enforcement ABCTs, including the RCMP and CSIS, fully independent from Cabinet, with the heads appointed through an independent process, and require them to do regular, random audits, to issue public rulings after reviewing any situation, and make them accountable to the courts for proper enforcement of whichever law they enforce.

7. Lower the annual donation and loan limit to $75 which is the amount that 75% of donors give, as DWatch’s study of donations from 2016-2022 showed (to match Quebec’s world-leading $100 donation limit);

8. Prohibit financial institutions from making loans (if parties can prove they need more funds than they can raise from voters in $75 donations, establish matching and per-vote public funding and a public loan fund to close the gap).

9. Prohibit giving fake jobs, compensation or other benefits or advantages to anyone who is considering running in a nomination or party leadership contest, and to contestants, election candidates or political party officials.

10. Prohibit donations to nomination contestants, candidates and electoral district associations (EDAs) from outside the electoral district.

11. Require disclosure of all the identity of all donors/lenders and the amount donated/loaned, and spending, before voting begins, and require quarterly disclosure between elections of donations, loans and spending by EDAs and parties.

12. Close all the loopholes that currently allow for secret lobbying, and prohibit lobbyists from sponsoring interns in MP offices.

13. Reverse the changes made to the Lobbyists’ Code in 2023 so lobbyists will again be prohibited from fundraising, campaigning and assisting politicians and party leaders.

14. Prohibit politicians, their staff, Cabinet appointees and government employees from having outside jobs, secret investments, and from accepting gifts or other benefits, and prohibit them from taking part in decision-making processes when they have even an appearance of a conflict of interest.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Foreign Interference in Canadian Politics Campaign and Honesty in Politics Campaign and Money in Politics Campaign and Stop Secret Unethical Lobbying Campaign and Government Ethics Campaign and Stop Bad Government Appointments Campaign

Bill C-25 allows one voter to spend millions influencing a federal election, mostly in secret

Foreign “proxies” and wealthy Canadians and lobbyists also allowed to spend unlimited funds in secret in nomination and party leadership contests, including on disinformation campaigns, and to hide their funders, and to fundraise in secret, and high donation limits make it easy to funnel big money into political system

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Tuesday, May 26, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, as Democracy Watch testifies at noon before the House Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Bill C-25, which changes Canada’s federal election law, DWatch released the list it has filed with the Committee of 20 key changes needed to the Bill.  The changes are needed to close the huge loopholes in the elections law that allow for secret, undemocratic and unethical spending, fundraising, donations, loans, and disinformation campaigns by wealthy Canadians, lobbyists and front groups funded by foreign governments, businesses and other organizations.

If Bill C-25 is not amended by the Committee, and is enacted in its current form, all of the following undemocratic, unethical activities will continue to be allowed, either legally or effectively because of loopholes in Canada’s election law:

•  One voter will still be allowed to spend millions influencing a federal election, mostly in secret;

•  Foreign front group “proxies” and wealthy Canadian voters and interest groups (“third parties”) will still be allowed to spend unlimited funds in secret to influence nomination and party leadership contests (unlike in the U.S.);

•  Everyone, especially foreigners, will still be allowed to mislead voters with disinformation campaigns making false claims about any issue;

•  Foreign “proxies” and “third parties” (Canadian voters and interest groups) will still be allowed to hide their funders (unlike in the U.S.);

•  Everyone (including lobbyists for big businesses, unions and other organizations) will still be allowed to secretly fundraise and do other secret favours for parties, party leaders, riding associations, candidates and nomination and party leadership contestants, and;

•  Everyone will still be allowed to funnel big money amounts into the federal political system because of the much-too-high federal donation and loan limit of more than $3,500 annually (75% of voters only donate $75 each year).

Among the 20 key changes Democracy Watch’s calls on the Committee to make to Bill C-25, all of which are legal amendments, are the following overall sets of changes:

1. Prohibit all false claims made by anyone at any time anywhere about elections and other processes in Canada, including false election promises by parties and party leaders.

2. Prohibit the publishing of survey results in the few days before the election, given how easy it is to mislead voters with an invalid survey.

3. Prohibit foreign influence activities that are currently legal.

4. Prohibit foreigners and people under age 18 from voting in nomination and party leadership contests.

5. To ensure conflicts of interest caused by political favours can be tracked, require public disclosure of staff, top-level volunteers and campaigners, fundraisers (and amounts raised and how) by nomination and party leadership contestants, candidates, riding associations and parties, and disclosure of all volunteers to Elections Canada.

6. Require third parties to register and disclose all their donors and spending if they spend more than $100 during a nomination contest, party leadership contest, or during a pre-election period, election period or policy-making process, including trying to influence political party officials, and prohibit them from colluding with contestants.

7. Only allow a third-party individual to spend $100, and citizen groups to spend an amount based on how many voters actually support them, and prohibit business “third parties” from spending at all, during contests, elections and policy-making processes.

8. Only allow citizen group “third parties” to spend money raised from Canadian citizens and permanent residents.

“Bill C-25 proposes some ineffective half-measures that won’t stop the undemocratic influence of wealthy interests, disinformation and foreign interference on Canada’s elections, and MPs on the committee should take the opportunity to strengthen these measures and make other key changes to close many other huge, unethical and undemocratic loopholes in Canada’s election law,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “Bill C-25 also proposes to add a new loophole to the law that will make it essentially impossible to determine if a lobbyist or someone who wants something from politicians is helping organize or holding a fundraising event for a party, riding association or candidate, and that secrecy is a recipe for corruption, waste of the public’s money and other abuses.”

Many more changes are needed to ensure fair, democratic, ethical elections, and to stop foreign interference, and Democracy Watch’s final submission to the Hogue Inquiry called on the Inquiry’s final report to recommend these changes (Click here to see details), including:

1. Prohibit anonymous social media accounts and Internet sites, and bots.

2. Prohibit media and social media outlets from allowing posts with false claims, including fake videos and audio files.

3. Have complaints about disinformation go to federal agencies, boards, commissions and tribunals (ABCTs) that already have expertise in various issue areas.

4. Empower the ABCTs to order Internet and social media companies to remove false posts and webpages, and to block sites that refuse to remove or prevent false claims from being posted on their site.

5. Empower the ABCTs to penalize misleaders and misleading social media companies and websites with significant fines.

6. Lower the annual donation and loan limit to $75 which is the amount that 75% of donors give, as DWatch’s study of donations from 2016-2022 showed (to match Quebec’s world-leading $100 donation limit);

7. Prohibit financial institutions from making loans (if parties can prove they need more funds than they can raise from voters in $75 donations, establish matching and per-vote public funding and a public loan fund to close the gap).

8. Prohibit giving fake jobs, compensation or other benefits or advantages to anyone who is considering running in a nomination or party leadership contest, and to contestants, election candidates or political party officials.

9. Prohibit donations to nomination contestants, candidates and electoral district associations (EDAs) from outside the electoral district.

10. Require disclosure of all the identity of all donors/lenders and the amount donated/loaned, and spending, before voting begins, and require quarterly disclosure between elections of donations, loans and spending by EDAs and parties.

11. Close all the loopholes that currently allow for secret lobbying, and prohibit lobbyists from sponsoring interns in MP offices.

12. Reverse the changes made to the Lobbyists’ Code in 2023 so lobbyists will again be prohibited from fundraising, campaigning and assisting politicians and party leaders.

13. Prohibit politicians, their staff, Cabinet appointees and government employees from having outside jobs, secret investments, and from accepting gifts or other benefits, and prohibit them from taking part in decision-making processes when they have even an appearance of a conflict of interest.

14. Make all enforcement ABCTs, including the RCMP and CSIS, fully independent from Cabinet, with the heads appointed through an independent process, and require them to do regular, random audits, to issue public rulings after reviewing any situation, and make them accountable to the courts for proper enforcement of whichever law they enforce.

“The only way to stop foreign big money from flowing into Canada’s political finance system is to stop big money donations and loans,” said Conacher.  “As long as big money donations and loans are allowed, it will be easy for foreign governments, businesses and organizations to funnel large amounts of money secretly to nomination and party leadership contestants, election candidates, riding associations and parties.”

“Loopholes in key laws mean third-party businesses, organizations and individuals are currently allowed to spend an unlimited amount of money in secret supporting or opposing nomination and party leadership contestants, to hide the identity of their funders, and to lobby Cabinet ministers, government officials, politicians and political party officials in secret, unethical ways,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch. “These loopholes must be closed or third parties will continue to be used as fronts for foreign governments and entities to interfere in and influence Canadian elections and government policy-making processes in secret, unethical and undemocratic ways.”

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Foreign Interference in Canadian Politics Campaign and Honesty in Politics Campaign and Money in Politics Campaign and Stop Secret Unethical Lobbying Campaign and Government Ethics Campaign and Stop Bad Government Appointments Campaign

At least 895 law-breaking lobbyists have been let off in secret rulings without being identified publicly, and without any penalty

Commissioner also gutted key rules in the lobbying code in ways that allow for unethical lobbying

House Ethics Committee must recommend many key changes to close loopholes in the law and code, and to require effective enforcement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, May 20, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch released its report on Commissioner of Lobbying Nancy Bélanger’s negligently weak enforcement record of the federal Lobbying Act and Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct since she started in the position in January 2018 through to October 2025.  Given her incredibly bad record, Bélanger should not have been re-appointed to a second term as Commissioner in November 2024, and the House Ethics Committee clearly needs to push the government to strengthen the Act and require effective enforcement.

Commissioner Bélanger, in testimony on October 6, 2025 before the House of Commons Ethics Committee, admitted that she allows up to 10 violations of the Lobbying Act every week by lobbyists who fail to disclose their lobbying activities by the required deadlines (See p. 17 of testimony just above the 1245 mark, and p. 19 at the top of the second column).

Democracy Watch’s 17-page report details that:

1. Commissioner Bélanger has let off 98% (895 out of 912) of the lobbyists she has caught violating the Act or Code with a secret ruling that hid the identity of the violating lobbyist and did not penalize the violator in any way, according to her annual reports (and she has likely issued even more secret rulings letting off lobbyists that she has not disclosed).

2.  For all 895 violations, Commissioner Bélanger could have issued a public ruling identifying and finding the lobbyist guilty of violating the Lobbyists’ Code as a former Commissioner did in a past case.

3. In addition, Commissioner Bélanger and the RCMP are both currently violating the Access to Information Act (ATIA) by hiding their investigation records in 13 key cases of violations of the Lobbying Act that they both let go without any charges or penalties, including violations by lobbyists for SNC-Lavalin, and likely also including violations by lobbyists for Facebook, WE Charity and others that would have embarrassed the Trudeau Liberal Cabinet. Click here to see details.

4. As well, Commissioner Bélanger let off two lobbyists who clearly violated the Code by helping Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland win an election, and serving on her riding association executive, and then lobbying her office and department soon afterwards. Click here to see details.

5. Also, Commissioner Bélanger conducted annual audits of a sample of lobbyists’ monthly disclosures of their communications with public office holders from 2018 to 2023, but then stopped doing the audits without giving any reason, even though the audits were catching violations.

6. Commissioner Bélanger also gutted key rules in the Code in 2023 in ways that allow for rampant unethical lobbying, ignoring the opposition to the changes from a coalition of 26 citizen groups with 1.5 million total supporters, and 41 lawyers and professors from across Canada, and 20,000+ voters. Click here for details.

7. Commissioner Bélanger has also used her power to grant 31 exemptions to the (loophole-filled) 5-year prohibition on lobbying after leaving public office.

The House Ethics Committee is currently conducting an illegally long-overdue review of the Lobbying Act for the first time since 2012 (the Act is required to be reviewed by a committee every five years).  Commissioner Bélanger’s horrible enforcement record makes it clear that many changes are needed to the Act to require the Commissioner to enforce the Act and Lobbyists’ Code strictly, strongly, effectively and transparently (in addition to closing a “dirty dozen” secret lobbying loopholes in the Act, and closing unethical lobbying loopholes in the Code).

“Commissioner of Lobbying Nancy Bélanger has a negligently weak enforcement record and has let hundreds of lobbyists violate the federal lobbying law and code without identified the lobbyists publicly or penalizing them in any way, and she also gutted the code in ways that allow for unethical lobbying,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch. “To stop rampant secret, unethical lobbying, the House Ethics Committee’s current review of the law must result in recommendations that call for closing all the loopholes, and requiring the Commissioner to enforce the law and code strictly, strongly, effectively and transparently, and to impose a penalty for all violations.”

The 13 violations Commissioner Bélanger and the RCMP are currently hiding include, in at least one of the 13 cases, lobbying by SNC-Lavalin lobbyists during the Trudeau Liberal Cabinet/SNC-Lavalin scandal, likely by former PCO Clerk Kevin Lynch for SNC-Lavalin that was not registered by CEO Neil Bruce (click here to see DWatch’s March 2019 complaint), and by SNC-Lavalin lawyer Robert Pritchard and others.  The violations also likely include the following situations that have never been ruled on publicly by the Commissioner:

1. The unregistered lobbying and favours for Trudeau Liberal Cabinet ministers that Kevin Chan and others at Facebook did (click here to see DWatch’s April 2018 complaint to the Commissioner);

2. The unregistered lobbying that WE Charity lobbyists did of Trudeau Liberal Cabinet ministers from January 2019 to August 2020, and the trip gifts they gave to former Liberal Finance Minister Bill Morneau and his family;

3. The lobbying by Imperial Oil of then-Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer, and by CPA Canada of Minister Karina Gould, at a May 2019 event they sponsored, and/or;

4. The lobbying done by associates of Jenni Byrne, then at top adviser to Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Secret, Unethical Lobbying Campaign and Stop Bad Government Appointments Campaign

Government’s new review of IRAC does nothing to stop current, conflict-ridden investigation by IRAC of its own failure to complete its investigation in 2018

RCMP also has questionable record of investigating such activities – second fully independent cross-Canada inquiry needed into land purchases by foreigners

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Tuesday, May 19, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch joined with the Save PEI Association in calling in an open letter to the provincial government and all party leaders in the PEI legislature to work together to stop the current Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (IRAC) investigation of land purchases and other activities in PEI by the Great Enlightenment Buddhist Institute (GEBIS) and Great Wisdom Buddhist Institute (GWBI) in the past 15 years and, instead, establish an independent inquiry.

The two groups also called for a second independent inquiry, in coordination with the federal government, to investigate national security and potential criminal issues in land purchases by foreigners across Canada.

The government’s new review of IRAC’s role, structure and responsibilities does not address the many outstanding and important questions about IRAC’s past decisions and actions.  Most importantly, a PEI legislative committee determined in October that IRAC didn’t complete its 2018 investigation into the land purchases by GEBIS and GWBI, which makes it clear that IRAC has a systemic conflict of interest and should not be trusted to investigate these land purchases.

As the letter details, IRAC’s current investigation:

•  is compromised by many other apparent conflicts of interest;

•  has only one special counsel from a relatively small labour law firm;

•  has a vague scope that is not comprehensive;

•  has not invited several expert witnesses to testify, and;

•  does not appear to be coordinated with the RCMP.

While the PEI government in October called on the RCMP and FINTRAC to investigate the land purchases and other activities of GEBIS and GWBI, the RCMP’s past track record on investigating the activities of these organizations is weak.  The RCMP issued a press announcement in response to the PEI government’s request for an investigation claiming that it investigated similar accusations previously and found no wrongdoing. However, the RCMP didn’t provide any details, and no one with relevant information was ever contacted by the RCMP.  The RCMP has unfortunately also closed several active investigations in PEI involving immigration fraud and related issues, without any explanation.

Former CSIS and RCMP investigators have also called for a public inquiry.

To ensure an independent, expert and comprehensive review, the government should establish a fully independent, fully-empowered, expert and well-resourced public inquiry to investigate the activities of GEBIS and GWBI, which operate under the umbrella of the multi-billion-dollar, multi-national, integrated monastic and business conglomerate headed by Bliss & Wisdom Monastery Corporation, which multiple reports have alleged has been infiltrated and taken over by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

The two citizen groups also called on the PEI government to establish a second provincial public inquiry, in coordination with the federal authorities, also staffed by a truly independent commissioner and investigators having the expertise and resources required to investigate the national security and potential criminal issues and the broader issues of land purchases by foreigners across Canada, and to recommend solutions, as was done by the Cullen Commission in British Columbia.

For both public inquiries to be independent and effective:

1. The inquiry commissioner (or, even better, three commissioners) must not have even an appearance of a conflict of interest concerning the matters to be investigated, and should come from outside of the province, and should be appointed through a merit-based candidate review process;

2. The inquiry must also be staffed with investigators who also must not have even an appearance of a conflict of interest concerning the matters to be investigated, and should also come from outside of the province, and must have the necessary financial, legal and international qualifications and expertise, and be given the funding and technical resources needed to complete a timely, full and detailed investigation of the situation;

3. In addition, given the international structure and activities of the organizations, the inquiry commissioners must retain a forensic investigations firm with international expertise and reach that also must not have even an appearance of a conflict of interest concerning the matters to be investigated and should also come from outside of the province, and;

4. The public should be allowed to participate as interveners.

“It is clear that IRAC has lost the confidence of the public because of its many very questionable past decisions and actions, and only a fully independent, fully transparent public inquiry staffed by experts with the skills and resources needed to investigate a multibillion dollar, multinational religious and business conglomerate will arrive at the truth and ensure the islanders truly understand the plans of these China-connected organizations,” said Jan Matejcek of the Save PEI Association.

“The PEI government, its land transfer approval commission and the RCMP have all failed for the past 15 years to stop land purchases in the province and other questionable activities by organizations allegedly connected to China’s government, and a fully independent, fully empowered, expert and well-resourced public inquiry is the only effective way to investigate why this has happened, and what can be done to finally reverse this land grab and stop these activities,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “A second fully independent, fully empowered, expert and well-resourced public inquiry is also needed into land purchases by foreigners across Canada and other forms of foreign interference in Canada’s economy.”

The Hogue Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions issued a negligently weak, cover-up final report at the end of January recommending only a few of many key changes needed to stop foreign interference in Canadian political processes.

Another comprehensive bill is needed to close the many huge loopholes ignored by Commissioner Hogue, and left open by Bill C-70, which was passed by the House and Senate in five weeks in May-June 2024, but is full of loopholes.  Almost two years later, the federal Liberal government has still failed to establish the Foreign Influence Registry (FIR) to require foreign agents to disclose their activities, only recently appointed the new Foreign Influence Transparency (FIT) Commissioner (who, under Bill C-70, will lack independence and key investigation powers and public accountability requirements).

Click here to see the Backgrounder that summarizes all the loopholes and weak enforcement problems that make foreign interference legal and easy to do across Canada at every level of government.

Click here to see summary list of 17 key changes that need to be made to stop foreign interference.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Jan Matejcek
Cell: 902-394-3733
Save PEI Association
Email: [email protected]

Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: 613-241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Foreign Interference in Canadian Politics Campaign

Trudeau’s process was not independent, and neither were the Senators appointed, as PM chose all advisory committee members, and could secretly ignore their secret recommendations

If Carney doesn’t make the appointment system fully independent, it will be more evidence of how power-mad he is – best solution is abolition

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, May 7, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, as nine Senate seats sit empty and six more senators will retire this year, and Liberal PM Mark Carney continues to refuse to answer questions about what exact process he will use for appointing senators (other than indicating he will likely use a partisan process as Justin Trudeau used), Democracy Watch called on federal party leaders to agree to move forward with a proposal:

1. To abolish the Senate;

2. To have an elected Senate, or;

3. To have an actually fully independent committee do a public, merit-based search for no more than 1-3 fully qualified candidates for each Senate seat, and then an all-party committee should, by consensus, make the final choice of each senator.

Given:

1. the partisan charade of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Senate appointment process, which didn’t change anything substantive (as DWatch pointed out in January 2016);

2. that having appointed Senators is fundamentally undemocratic;

3. the problems with any other possible Senate appointment reforms, and;

4. that the House can be reformed to give it the same regional balance and powers of review that the Senate has;

Democracy Watch’s position is still that abolition of the Senate is the best solution.  To give the House of Commons more of the key characteristics of the Senate, more seats from outside Central Canada should be added to the House, and changes made to free MPs from the control of their party leader.

Despite Trudeau’s claims, his Senate appointment advisory boards were not independent as he chose all the members, which made them partisan, and he could secretly ignore their secret list of nominees (and they had no power to disclose when he did this), and the system was policy that could be abandoned at any time (as opposed to being enacted in law).

Trudeau’s partisan, patronage-ridden process resulted in him appointing many partisan Liberals as senators overall, most in recent years, out of the 100 senators he appointed.   As well, all appointees were still required to meet the discriminatory constitutional requirements for senators of being at least 30 years old, and own property worth at least $4,000 and other assets worth at least $4,000.

“Trudeau’s change to the Senate appointment process was a partisan charade, as no one is independent if they are dependent on the Prime Minister for having their position on an advisory board or as a Senator,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “Just like past prime ministers, Trudeau chose a group of people to consult with in secret about who to appoint as senators, and then secretly chose whomever he wanted to appoint, including many ruling party supporters.”

“The Senate is fundamentally undemocratic and should be abolished for that reason alone, and a Senate loaded with ruling party patronage cronies is a useless waste of money so, if the Senate is not going to be abolished, then senators should at least be made fully independent through a fully independent appointment process,” said Conacher.

“If Mark Carney returns to ruling-party crony senator appointments, or does anything less than work with other party leaders to establish a fully independent appointment process, he will provide further evidence that he is a power-mad, fundamentally undemocratic prime minister,” said Conacher.

A fully independent Senate appointment process won’t change anything in terms of the Senate’s powers, which should always bow to the democratically elected House (which is part of the reason the Senate is an undemocratic waste of time and money).  However, an independent process would at least result in qualified, independent-minded people being appointed who wouldn’t roll over to protect the ruling party and would actually, expertly and effectively hold the government to account if it was lying or spinning about the effects of its legislative or spending proposals.

In addition, the Senate should change its rules to limit itself to, at most, a six-month delay of any bill passed by the House.  The UK House of Lords has had this limit on its powers since 1911.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Shut Down the Senate Campaign and Stop Muzzling MPs Campaign

 

Selection process for Governor General should be democratized and Canadianized also to strengthen Canada’s sovereignty, diminish monarchy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Tuesday, May 5, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch criticized Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney for handpicking the new Governor General, who is a key guardian of democratic good government, through a secretive, partisan process.

Like the Officers of Parliament, the Governor General (GG) must be independent of the Prime Minister and ruling party Cabinet because s/he makes many key decisions about the operations of Parliament and the government.  The Prime Minister and Cabinet should not be choosing the GG (or any Officer of Parliament) alone because it taints the position with partisanship and makes them weak lapdogs of the PM.

Carney’s appointment process is even worse than former PM Trudeau’s process.  Trudeau tried to rig the selection of the Governor General (even more than former Prime Minister Harper did) by setting up a façade of an Advisory Panel, co-chaired by his friend and Cabinet appointee Dominic LeBlanc, with every other member of the Panel also appointed by Trudeau, after the fiasco of the appointment of former GG Julie Payette who wasn’t vetted properly by Trudeau’s PMO, and who resigned after an investigation report revealed she created a toxic work environment for her staff.

Power-mad PM Carney also missed an opportunity to work federal party leaders to learn the lessons of the past, and strengthen Canada’s sovereignty, by reaching an agreement on a new, democratic and Canadian selection process for the next Governor General (GG) that does not request approval from King Charles (all of which can be done without changing any law or Canada’s Constitution).

The PM not asking for the King’s approval of the GG would have sent a clear signal that Canada still doesn’t have full sovereignty.  It would have also sent a message to U.S. President Donald Trump that Canada does not approve of monarchs, which is a dangerous message to send given Trump is acting like he has king-like power and immunity from accountability, including the king-like power to annex Canada.

Survey results in 2023 (see also here and here and here) and 2024 show a majority or near majority of Canadians don’t want Canada to continue to be a constitutional monarchy.

“Given how important it is for the Governor General to be independent of the Prime Minister and impartial, Carney should not have handpicked his appointee through a secretive, partisan process,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “The Governor General should have been chosen through a democratic process, and the Prime Minister should also have told King Charles who Canada chose, and not asked his approval, and if he had accepted that as the new protocol it would have become clear that Canada chooses its own head of state.”

“Carney and his cabal of old white guys are clearly power-mad as they are ignoring many democratic good government standards and voter concerns and are using many levers to consolidate and abuse the powers of the Prime Minister’s office, which has more unchecked powers than any democratically elected leader in the world,” said Conacher.

To democratize the selection of the Governor General, without needing any changes to any law or Canada’s Constitution, Democracy Watch proposes that an independent committee whose members are approved by all federal party leaders in the House of Commons be established to conduct a public, merit-based search for a shortlist of three nominees for GG, and then at least all federal party leaders should approve the final choice of GG, or better would be a secret, ranked ballot vote by MPs.

Even better, given that the GG appoints the Lieutenant Governors of each province, the Prime Minister should send the shortlist of three nominees to the recognized party leaders in each legislature across Canada and have them rank the nominees in a secret ballot.  The GG would be the person who receives the most votes from this ranked ballot vote.

This would give the GG the democratic legitimacy to say no to abuses of power by the PM, without tainting the GG with partisanship (as would happen if the GG was elected directly by voters, given candidates would very likely run under party banners).

To Canadianize the selection of the Governor General, Democracy Watch proposes that the Prime Minister should not request that King Charles approve of the person chosen through the process.  The King does have to approve the person formally, but if the Prime Minister does not request the approval, and the King agrees to whomever is nominated, then a new constitutional convention will be established that Canada chooses its own Head of State.  This will be a simple but significant step toward full independence for Canada, and would make our political system more a parliamentary democracy and less a constitutional monarchy.

For the appointment of every other federal good government watchdog, a fully independent committee with members approved by all federal party leaders should also be conducting public, merit-based searches for a shortlist of qualified candidates for each position.  Democracy Watch also proposes that this process be used to find qualified non-MP candidates for Speaker of the House of Commons.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Democratic Head Campaign and Stop PM/Premier Abuses Campaign

Case will target retroactive, excessive secrecy measures in Ford’s budget Bill 97, opposed by most voters, that hide communications between ministers and lobbyists and others trying to influence the government

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, April 30, 2026

TORONTO – Today, Democracy Watch announced that it will soon file a constitutional challenge to the excessive government secrecy measures in the PC Party Doug Ford government’s recently enacted budget Bill 97.

The measures, which were rammed through the Ontario legislature along with the rest of Bill 97 without any committee hearings, make records in the custody or control of a Cabinet Minister’s or Parliamentary Assistant’s office (unless the records are in the custody of another institution) exempt from disclosure under Ontario’s open government law (the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA)). The measures apply retroactively back to 1988.

The changes mean that communications of Cabinet ministers, Parliamentary Assistants or their staff with lobbyists and others outside the government who are trying to influence the Cabinet’s decisions can no longer be requested under Ontario’s open government law.  Because the measures apply retroactively, every past request back to 1988 in which the records have not yet been disclosed is effectively cancelled, even if Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner or a court has issued an order that those records be disclosed.

Premier Ford and his Cabinet ministers made many false claims about the measures, but Ford essentially admitted when responding to media questions, and in the legislature, that the measures are to protect his cellphone records from being disclosed to the public.

Ford uses his personal cellphone for government business calls.  Several years ago, a journalist and a member of the public requested Ford’s cellphone call log records (not including personal information contained in the records) concerning the Greenbelt scandal and decisions made during COVID.  Premier Ford refused to disclose the records.  The Information Commissioner’s office ordered Ford to disclose the records in November 2024.  Ford challenged the order in court, and in December 2025 the Divisional Court upheld the Commissioner’s order that Ford was required to disclose the records.

The changes make the Ford Cabinet the most secretive of all cabinets across Canada, and will derail freedom of information (FOI) requests that have revealed scandals in the past, including the Greenbelt scandal.  A survey showed that 60% of Ontario voters oppose the changes (including 53% of PC Party supporters), while only 24% support them, and 64% think the changes are aimed at reducing government accountability.

According to a survey in January 2025, more than 85% of Canadians want to know the details of all lobbying activities, and more than 80% are concerned about the corrupting effects of secret, unethical lobbying on politicians’ policy-making decisions.

“The changes that the Ford government rammed through the legislature are dangerously undemocratic and will make Cabinet ministers’ decisions and actions much more secretive, and that will lead to even more corruption, waste of the public’s money and other abuses of power,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch. “Democracy Watch’s court case will challenge the constitutionality of both Ford’s excessive secrecy measures, and the fact that they apply retroactively and, in effect, overturn a binding court order.”

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that voters have a constitutional right to disclosure of government information that they need to have meaningful debates, and make informed choices, on matters of public importance, including concerning the conduct of politicians and government officials. As far as Democracy Watch has determined, the retroactivity issue in the case has not been ruled on by Canadian courts.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Open Government Campaign

The loopholes also make secret foreign interference in B.C. politics easy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, April 23, 2026

TORONTO – Today, Democracy Watch called on the MLAs on B.C.’s Special Committee on the Lobbyists Transparency Act to recommend all the changes needed to stop secret, unethical lobbying at the provincial and municipal level across B.C.

Last September, Democracy Watch filed a 26-page submission with the Special Committee during its public consultation phase that detailed all the loopholes in B.C.’s lobbying law, and set out 30 key measures needed to stop secret, unethical lobbying.  The Special Committee has until April 29, 2026 to release its report.

“B.C.’s lobbying law allows for secret, unethical lobbying and legalized bribery that corrupts policy-making by the provincial government and municipal councils and leads to decisions that protect private interests, ignore voters’ concerns, waste the public’s money, and harm the environment and cities and towns across the province,” said Duff Conacher, PhD and Co-founder of Democracy Watch.

B.C.’s lobbying law has the following huge loopholes that allow for secret, unethical lobbying at the provincial and municipal levels (and these loopholes also allow for secret foreign interference in B.C. politics):

1. The law only applies to lobbying of provincial politicians and government officials. Surrey and Kelowna have set up lobbying registries, but other municipalities in the province haven’t.  The province should establish a province-wide municipal registry to ensure best-practice lobbying disclosure and ethics requirements across the province.

2. Lobbyists are allowed to fundraise and campaign for, and assist in other ways, politicians they are lobbying (which is essentially legalized bribery), because B.C.’s lobbying law does not prohibit this (lobbyists are only required to comply with some non-governmental organization’s code of conduct);

3. While lobbyists can only give gifts worth $100 annually to provincial politicians and officials, they can give unlimited gifts to nomination contestants, and to political party officials and party leadership contestants who are not an MLA (which is also essentially legalized bribery);

4. Unpaid lobbying is not required to be disclosed;

5. Lobbying in response to a written request from a politician, political staff person or government official is not required to be disclosed;

6. Lobbying by a business or organization with fewer than six employees who collectively lobby less than 50 hours a year is not required to be disclosed (unless the organization’s primary purpose is advocacy, and then it is required to register all of its lobbying);

7. Lobbying of provincial political party officials (who can easily pass on the lobbyist’s message to party leaders) is not required to be disclosed;

8. Lobbying of an enforcement agency that oversees a business or organization is not required to be disclosed;

9. The amount spent on a lobbying effort (including the amount paid to “hired gun” consultant lobbyists) is not required to be disclosed;

10. Only donations of $1,000 or more to a lobby group are required to be disclosed;

11. The loopholes that allow for secret lobbying mean that the limits on gifts do not apply to lobbyists who are not required to register, and there is not actually a prohibition on Cabinet ministers and top government officials lobbying for 2 years after they leave office (it is only a prohibition on doing registrable lobbying – also, the prohibition should be for at least 5 years).

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Secret, Unethical Lobbying Campaign and World’s Best Democracy Fund

 

Federal Court of Appeal should hear the appeal, and should issue ruling that not only rejects Trudeau’s unjustifiable prorogation, but also restricts PM’s power to prorogue Parliament in future

Prorogation was in Liberal’s self-interest, opposition parties intended to vote non-confidence in the government, other options were available

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, April 22, 2026

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch is an intervener at the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) in the first hearing of the first step of the appeal of the Federal Court’s ruling in the case challenging the January 6, 2025 request by Prime Minister Trudeau that the Governor General prorogue (shut down) Parliament until March 24, 2025.

Today’s hearing is focused solely on the issue of whether or not the FCA should hear the appeal given the prorogation ended long ago.  Both the appellants and the Attorney General of Canada want the appeal to go ahead, as does Democracy Watch, so that the FCA will issue a ruling on the important legal issues re:

1. Whether the Prime Minister can prorogue Parliament anytime the PM wants, or are their constitutional restrictions on prorogations?

2. Whether the courts should hear and rule on challenges to prorogations?

The hearing of this first step of the appeal is this morning, April 22nd from 9:30 am to about 11:30 am at 180 Queen St. W., 7th floor in Toronto or click here to register to watch it online (under Hearing Lists, File #A-131-25,  David Joseph MacKinnon et al v. Canada (Attorney General) et al).  Democracy Watch is represented at the hearing by Justyna Zukowski, and also Wade Poziomka, Nick Papageorge, of Ross & McBride LLP.

The prorogation was clearly in the Liberal Party’s self-interest as it gave the party time to hold its leadership contest to replace Trudeau, and happened at a time when the opposition parties were clearly intending to vote non-confidence in the government soon after Parliament’s usual winter break was scheduled to end on January 27, 2025.  (Click here to see DWatch’s legal arguments).

Democracy Watch is calling on the court to reject Trudeau’s unjustifiable prorogation and issue a ruling like the UK Supreme Court’s unanimous 2019 ruling that it was illegal for then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson to prorogue Parliament for no justifiable reason when a majority of MPs wanted Parliament to stay open and operating.

Democracy Watch is also calling on the court to look forward and issue a ruling that will prevent the current bad situation from happening again.  The court should establish restrictions on the Prime Minister’s power to prorogue Parliament in the future, restrictions that comply with binding Supreme Court of Canada rulings that mandate courts to balance the power of the PM with Canada’s key constitutional principles that require the government (the PM and Cabinet) to have the support of a majority of MPs (known as the principles of responsible government, the sovereignty of Parliament, and democracy).

The three practical restrictions that Democracy Watch is calling on the court to establish on the PM’s power to prorogue, restrictions that will work in every future situation, especially during minority governments, are as follows:

1. Has notice of a motion of non-confidence in the government been given in Parliament, or has a vote on a matter of confidence (e.g. a supply measure) been scheduled in Parliament? If yes, then the Prime Minister is prohibited from proroguing until the motion or vote is decided.

2. If the answer to question #1 is no, have the leaders of opposition parties who represent a majority of MPs in the House of Commons clearly and publicly indicated that their parties’ MPs intend to vote non-confidence in the government? If yes, then the Prime Minister is prohibited from proroguing outside of, and longer than, a scheduled adjournment period of Parliament.

3. If the answer to question #2 is no, have a majority of MPs voted in favour of a prorogation at a time that is outside of and/or longer than a scheduled adjournment period of Parliament? If yes, then the Prime Minister is permitted prorogue Parliament for that time period.

“While a non-confidence motion was not being debated when Trudeau’s prorogation was requested, and while it is fair to allow a political party to change leaders before an election occurs, the Prime Minister dictating that Parliament must shut down for almost three months to avoid a non-confidence vote in his government that would trigger an election, without consulting any opposition leaders or even Liberal MPs, is fundamentally undemocratic and unjustifiable,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch.  “The Prime Minister had other options and, from all evidence, could have reached an agreement sometime in 2024 with one or more opposition parties to have the Liberals hold a party leadership contest while Parliament continued operating.”

“Hopefully the courts will take this opportunity to restrict this kind of abuse of power from happening in the future by issuing a ruling that makes it clear what is a legal, justifiable prorogation and what amounts to an illegal prorogation,” said Conacher.  “All federal parties should also work together to set out clear rules that restrict prorogations, snap elections, and other powers of the Prime Minister, like the rules enacted years ago by all parties in Britain, Australia and New Zealand parties.”

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Stop Prorogations and other Power Abuses Fund