CBC Power and Politics piece unavailable

Dear Editor:

Jean T. Fournier writes that in his seven years as Senate Ethics Officer he did not hear from any other Canadian ethics commissioner about any politician using their position “to get special treatment for the companies on whose boards they sat” (Letter – Nov. 12).

He fails to mention that none of the ethics commissioners across Canada conduct audits of what politicians and government officials do — so of course they haven’t caught anyone.  He also neglects to note that Alberta government officials recently blew the whistle on MLA Peter Sandhu because he was lobbying them on behalf of his own business.

Mr. Founier also ignores the fact that a huge loophole in political ethics rules across Canada makes it legal for all politicians (including Cabinet ministers), political staff and Cabinet appointees to lobby for special treatment for their own and their companies’ financial interests.  Because of this loophole, the Alberta ethics commissioner ruled that Mr. Sandhu’s lobbying was not a violation of ethics rules.

As well, a politician or government official can also very easily give special treatment to their own or their companies’ interests through inaction — for example by not advocating for regulations that increase protection for consumers, the environment, children etc.

To have governments that protect the public interest, ethics rules must be strengthened across Canada either to prohibit politicians and government officials from having any business investments or other ties to businesses, or to prohibit them from taking part in any decision-making process if there is even an appearance that the decision could benefit them or their business in any way.

Federal politicians enacted rules 25 years ago that prohibit federal public servants from taking part in any decision-making process if there is an appearance that the decision could benefit them or their family in any way (not just financially).  MPs are currently reviewing federal ethics rules — they should stop being hypocritical and start being ethics by finally imposing the same prohibition on all federal politicians, political staff and appointees.

Sincerely,
Duff Conacher, Founding Director of Democracy Watch

---

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign

Group launches letter-writing campaign for changes that will help stop abuses of power by the Prime Minister and premiers, and make legislatures much more fair and democratic

OTTAWA – Today, as Prince Charles celebrates his 65^th birthday, Democracy Watch launched a letter-writing campaign for key changes to empower, democratize and Canadianize the Governor General and provincial lieutenant governors.  All the changes can be made by simple resolutions in each legislature – no amendments needed to the written Constitution – and all will help stop abuses of power by the Prime Minister and provincial premiers and make every legislature more fair and democratic, and Canadian.

“The Governor General and provincial lieutenant governors are supposed to play a key role in checking abuses of power by the Prime Minister and premiers, but they are appointed lapdogs with no clear rules to enforce,” said Duff Conacher, Board member of Democracy Watch.  “The Governor General and lieutenant governors must be chosen democratically, and given clear, written rules to enforce, to ensure they can stop abuses of power by the Prime Minister and premiers.”

First, as the national legislatures in Britain, Australia and New Zealand have done, the federal and provincial legislatures should pass a law or resolution that sets out the following five clear rules concerning key processes that involve the Prime Minister (PM) and Governor General (GG), and a premier and the province’s Lieutenant Governor (LG) (processes which are currently regulated by very unclear, unwritten constitutional conventions):

1. General election dates are fixed every four years (preferably on the last Monday in October), and the PM/premier may only ask the GG/LG to call an election in between the election dates if the legislature votes non-confidence in the government;
2. The legislature must be opened within 30 days after each general election, and must be open at 120 days each year;
3. After each election, the political party that obtains the most seats in the election shall be given the first opportunity to form a government and demonstrate that it has the confidence of the legislature, and if the legislature votes non-confidence in that government then the leading opposition party shall be given the same opportunity, or can refuse it and allow the GG/LG to call an election;
4. A vote of non-confidence is only a vote on a resolution that reads “The legislature does not have confidence in the government” and after a government loses a non-confidence vote, the leading opposition party shall be given the opportunity to form a government and demonstrate that it has the confidence of the legislature, or it can refuse that opportunity allowing the GG/LG to call an election, and;
5. The PM/premier may only request that the GG/LG prorogue the legislature during the regularly scheduled annual adjournment periods, and only until the scheduled end of any adjournment.

Secondly, given that the written Constitution does not require that the Governor General be selected in any specific way, the federal Parliament should pass a law establishing a new, democratic process for choosing the Governor General (GG).  The law should create a new federal Cabinet appointments agency made up of five people chosen with the approval of the leaders of all federal political parties recognized in the House of Commons.  That agency should conduct a public, advertised, merit-based search to come up with a shortlist of three qualified candidates for GG (this agency should also do similar searches for candidates for all other federal Cabinet appointments).  Then, a convention should be held attended by the leaders of every party recognized in the federal, provincial and territorial legislatures, with the GG approved by at least two-thirds of the leaders.  This will result in a democratically representative, non-partisan and qualified GG being chosen every time.

As well, currently each provincial lieutenant governor (LG) is chosen by the Prime Minister (usually after consulting only with the premier of the province) and approved by the Governor General.  The federal Parliament should also pass a law that requires the appointments agency to search for qualified candidates, and requires the Prime Minister to have the approval of the leaders of all provincial parties recognized in the provincial legislature for the person chosen to be LG, to give each LG democratic legitimacy.

Finally, given that the written Constitution does not require that the Prime Minister request the Queen’s approval of the Governor General (GG), the Prime Minister should simply not request the Queen’s approval for the next person chosen to be GG.  It is very likely that the Queen will still proclaim the person as Canada’s GG, thereby establishing a new constitutional convention that will Canadianize the GG.

 – 30 –

 FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Duff Conacher, Board member of Democracy Watch

[email protected]

---

Democracy Watch’s Democratic Head Campaign

Link to Globe and Mail article

Link to Toronto Star article

CTV News television interview link

Link to Huffington Post article

Link to CTV News television article

Calls for independent prosecutor to be appointed, and guarantees from RCMP Commissioner

 Senate motion to suspend without pay violates Parliament of Canada Act – new rules and enforcement system needed because House and Senate are kangaroo courts

Monday, October 28, 2013

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch launched a letter-writing drive (jointly with Leadnow.ca), and a national Change.org petition, calling on Prime Minister Harper and RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson to take key steps to ensure the truth comes out about the Senate scandals, and all wrongdoers are held accountable.

As well, Democracy Watch called for a completely new Senate penalty system – the current suspension without pay proposal violates sections 55 to 59 of the Parliament of Canada Act which make paying MPs and senators mandatory (s. 55) and only allow pay to be cut after an MP misses the House or Senate more than 21 days in a session (sections 57 and 59).  As well, having the House or Senate hand out penalties is a dangerously unfair process that is wide open to abuse because, like all legislatures, the House and Senate are kangaroo courts undermined by partisan and other political and personal conflicts of interest.  No one concerned about having a rule of law (ie. democracy) in Canada should endorse the current House or Senate discipline processes.

To have a democratic rule of law in this area, the House and Senate rules, and the rules in every legislature across Canada, should be changed to define exactly what suspensions (of various time periods) are mandatory for alleged and confirmed violations of criminal, ethics, spending and other integrity laws, codes and rules.  The suspensions should range from 6 months with pay up to losing one’s seat without pay or pension.  These changes will make standards of conduct and penalties clear to all, and remove the possibility of any legislature arbitrarily suspending, penalizing or kicking out some members but not others even if their violations are similar.

In addition, a fair compromise concerning pay for suspended senators and other politicians would be to establish a rule that if a politician is found guilty of the alleged violation, they would be required to return any pay received after the allegation was first made.

Concerning the Senate scandal overall, the various situations involving three Conservative senators (Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, Patrick Brazeau),former PM Chief of Staff Nigel Wright, and other Conservative senators and staff of the Prime Minister’s Office, are all currently being investigated by the RCMP and the Commissioner of Canada Elections, overseen by who knows which Crown prosecutor or prosecutors who may serve under Prime Minister Harper and Minister of Justice and Attorney General Peter MacKay.

The RCMP’s independence is questionable given the RCMP Commissioner’s widely criticized new policy revealed in April 2013 that aligns his office with the office of the Minister of Public Safety in all communications about the RCMP’s actions.  Many commentators have raised concerns about how this new policy negatively affects the ability of the RCMP to make independent law enforcement decisions, especially about the actions of government officials.

In similar situations, many provincial governments including in B.C. and Ontario have appointed independent prosecutors to ensure that investigations are conducted properly and thoroughly, and to ensure that decisions to prosecute are not undermined by career ambitions or other dangerous conflicts of interest.  However, even in these situations, the fact that the Premier or provincial Attorney General selected the special prosecutor led to questions about the independence of the prosecutor.

As a result of these serious questions about lack of independence and conflicts of interest that must be resolved in order to have a just and effective resolution of the situations involving the senators, Democracy Watch is calling on Prime Minister Harper to do the following:

1. appoint an independent prosecutor after consulting with and seeking the approval of all federal political party leaders to ensure a fully independent, fully non-partisan, qualified prosecutor is chosen;
2. empower the prosecutor to oversee and direct the investigations of all the Senate scandals that the RCMP and the Commissioner of Canada Elections are currently investigating;
3. require the prosecutor to give public updates on the status of all the investigations every month (of course, without disclosing any details that would undermine the investigations), and;
4. require the prosecutor to explain publicly if s/he decides not to prosecute someone who is facing allegations (as independent prosecutors have in B.C. in similar politically charged situations).

As well, Democracy Watch, together with Leadnow, is calling on RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson to take similar steps to ensure the integrity of the RCMP’s investigations.

Democracy Watch will continue pushing for these key independence guarantees to ensure independent, complete and transparent investigations and prosecutions of everyone wrongdoer in the Senate scandal.

-30-

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Duff Conacher, Board member of Democracy Watch
Tel: 613-241-5179 or Cell: 416-546-3443
[email protected]

---

Good ideas are barely worth cheering for in Ottawa, some days. Allan Cutler, a former Conservative candidate who was famous for whistleblowing during the Sponsorship Scandal, has lost faith in his former tribe’s commitment to government accountability. Cutler is the president of Canadians for Accountability—C4A, for short—where he spends his time giving tips to whistleblowers who intend to speak truth to power. This morning, the Ottawa Citizen gives Cutler a renewed voice. He teams up with former whistleblower Ian Bron—a C4A director—to talk about all the loopholes the government could close, and mechanisms the government could strengthen, and people the government could empower in tomorrow’s Throne Speech. There are five ideas, each probably worth at least a debate.