---

Letter to the Editor by Democracy Watch Coordinator Tyler Sommers published by iPolitics and the Hill Times, covered by CBC News and The Canadian Press, with CTV News Winnipeg, the Huffington Post, Metro News and 10 other media outlets all publishing the Canadian Press piece, and was quoted in a Canada.com article that was published by 3 Postmedia News newspapers.

---

Federal Conservative MP Merv Tweed is allowed to lobby his government in secret the day he resigns his seat and becomes President of Omnitrax raliway company because the Conservatives, specifically Minister Tony Clement, have failed to implement the May 2012 recommendations of the House Ethics Committee.

The Committee recommended closing some of the key loopholes that allow for secret, unethical lobbying, especially by former politicians. In his September 2012 response to the Committee, Minister Clement essentially rejected the Committee’s proposed change that would prohibit former politicians from lobbying right after they leave their position, and would require that all paid lobbying activity be disclosed.

As a result, Mr. Tweed will be allowed to lobby his former colleagues in secret up to one day each week, starting the day he leaves.

In fact, because the Conservatives broke their 2006 election promises to close lobbying restriction loopholes, not only MPs but also Cabinet ministers, senior government officials, senators and their staff, and the staff of MPs are all also allowed to lobby for a business the same day they leave their position, due to the 20% loophole, and also the following loopholes:

• all of them can be hired on contract to give advice, while providing free lobbying in secret, because the law does not require registration or disclosure of unpaid lobbying;
• all of them can be hired on contract or work as an employee of a business to lobby in secret about the enforcement, interpretation or application of laws and regulations in secret (which is a huge area of lobbying, especially for big businesses) because the law does not require registration or disclosure of this lobbying, and;
• all of them can, while lobbying, have secret emails, texts, phone calls and even meetings with Cabinet ministers and senior government officials as long as the minister or official initiates the communication or meeting (which they do whenever they want to have secret, unethical relations with a lobbyist) because the law only requires only oral, pre-arranged communications initiated by the lobbyist to be disclosed

For Cabinet ministers, there is a 2-year prohibition in the Conflict of Interest Act on taking jobs with or lobbying for any business or organization or person they had significant official dealings with in their last year in office (1-year for Cabinet staff and appointees and senior government officials). As well, public servants face the same 1-year prohbition under their conflict of interest code). However, all these people are still allowed to take jobs with, or lobby for, other businesses, organizations and people.

Canadians deserve better, especially from the Conservatives who promised to clean up the federal government.

---

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign

Democracy Watch’s submission on the Lobbying Act.

Brandon-Souris MP Merv Tweed is trading Parliament Hill for the Port of Churchill, leaving federal politics to run Omnitrax Canada.

OTTAWA — It was one in a seemingly innocuous list of emails Elections Canada received from a member of the public last year.

But the questions put forward by this particular, unidentified voter touched on what some say is a major loophole in the conduct of fair and honest federal election campaigns.

If there were more rock ‘n’ roll, at least Canadian politics would be entertaining. But the drugs, corruption and bitter negativity that have plagued every level of government this spring is just turning people off.

Increase voter turnout by changing voting system, passing honesty-in-politics law, fixing by-election and election dates for late fall/early spring, and advertising all voter rights

Thursday, August 8, 2013

OTTAWA – Today Democracy Watch called for democratic changes to Ontario’s election system in response to low voter turnout in the recent provincial by-elections.  Voter turnout will increase if the voting system is changed, an honesty-in-politics law is passed, by-election and election dates are fixed for late fall or early spring, and if Elections Ontario is required to educate Ontarians about all their voting rights in its advertising.

“The low average voter turnout of about 37% in the five by-elections held last week, along with the 49% turnout in the 2011 Ontario election,  show clearly that major changes are needed to counter the threat of low turnout to the provincial government’s democratic legitimacy.” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.  “Unfortunately Elections Ontario and the Government of Ontario have failed to change anything so far, and Premier Wynne chose dates for the by-elections when many people were on holiday which likely hurt voter turnout.”

In addition to Elections Ontario being given the power to set by-election dates, and requiring it to educate voters about their right to decline the ballot (and disclosing declined ballot totals in election results), the provincial Election Act must also be changed to require the holding of by-elections and elections in the late fall or early spring, when holidays, student exams and summer jobs, and general busyness of anyone with kids, are least likely to make it difficult for large numbers of people voting.

In addition, the most important changes the Ontario parties can make to increase voter turnout are as follows:

• pass an honesty-in-politics law that gives voters an easy, low-cost way to file complaints to the Integrity Commissioner, and gives the Commissioner the power to penalize misleaders (and requires MPPs who switch parties in-between elections to resign and run in a by-election);
• change the voting system so that the percentage of MPPs each party receives more closely matches the popular vote percentages.

These changes would give voters a reason to vote because they would know that voting for a specific party would mean a guaranteed result in terms of percentage of MPPs elected and promises kept.

In addition, if the parties strengthen provincial ethics, political finance, lobbying, open government, and whistleblower protection laws, voters will have more reason to vote because they would be more assured of good government no matter which party won.

“In addition to election dates often making it difficult for people to pay full attention to campaigns and get to the polls on election day, Canadians know from experience that they are not going to get what they vote for, and are likely to get dishonest, secretive, unethical, unrepresentative and wasteful government no matter who they vote for, and as a result no one should be surprised to see voter turnout at such low levels,” said Sommers.

These problems exist in all the provinces and territories across Canada.  All of these changes should be made by the federal and provincial and territorial governments, and for their municipalities, before either mandatory or Internet voting are tried (because both of those changes will likely have serious negative effects).

-30-

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
[email protected]

---

Democracy Watch’s Democratic Voting Systems Campaign

Ken Dryden – the former Toronto MP who lent himself $300,000 to take part in the 2006 Liberal leadership race – has no plans to raise money from individual contributors to pay off his outstanding campaign debt, says his lawyer.

Ontario Speaker Dave Levac says he did not feel politically pressured to change a gas plant contempt ruling, despite meeting with a senior Liberal staff member who wanted him to change his mind.

Ethics and Criminal Code measures prohibit accepting benefits that relate to premiers’ official duties, and trading favours

Thursday, July 25, 2013

OTTAWA — Democracy Watch announced today that it will file complaints with every provincial and territorial ethics/integrity commissioner about the benefits every premier is receiving from various corporations who are sponsoring the Council of the Federation meeting, and will also ask the police to investigate as the premiers are directly selling access to themselves at the meeting, given the Criminal Code anti-bribery measures.

The premiers are benefiting from the corporations’ sponsorship of the meeting. Premiers oversee all decision-making in their governments, and so every gift or benefit they receive relates to every decision the government makes. Almost all provincial and territorial ethics laws across Canada prohibit politicians from accepting any benefit that relates to their position except their pay and pension etc., and the usual hospitality and protocol gifts they receive when meeting with other governments or speaking at events. The corporate sponsorship of the event is far more than usual hospitality and protocol gifts, as it covers a significant portion of the costs of the event.

As well, sponsors get the benefit in return of reserved attendance at social events held during the three-day meeting, events attended by the premiers and their staff. Other people are also invited to those events, but only sponsors are guaranteed a spot. As a result, in effect the premiers are selling access to themselves and their staff.

The Criminal Code of Canada prohibits politicians and other public officials from accepting any direct or indirect gift or benefit in respect of doing anything or making any decision — the politician or official does not actually have to do anything or make any decision to violate these measures. In a leading 1996 case ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada interpreted government integrity measures in the Criminal Code and stated:

“it is not necessary for a corrupt practice to take place in order for the appearance of integrity to be harmed. Protecting these appearances is more than a trivial concern. . .” and “given the heavy trust and responsibility taken on by the holding of a public office or employ, it is appropriate that government officials are correspondingly held to codes of conduct which, for an ordinary person, would be quite severe . . .” and “The magnitude and importance of government business requires not only the complete integrity of government employees and officers conducting government business but also that this integrity and trustworthiness be readily apparent to society as a whole.”

Corporate sponsorship of the event has gone on for years, and so Democracy Watch complaints will also cover past years‘ meetings.

“Corporate lobbyists providing hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorship to cover the costs of a meeting of premiers, and getting special access in return, is dangerously unethical and undemocratic, and hopefully ethics commissioners and the police will finally put a stop to this unethical favour-trading,” said Duff Conacher, Founding Director of Democracy Watch and Adjunct Professor in good governance and ethics law at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law.

It is true that corporations and other organizations often hold events at which premiers and other politicians speak, and their attendance gives the corporation or organization access to them. But these events do not excuse the corporate sponsorship of the Council of the Federation meeting — instead they highlight how ethics commissioners and police forces cross the country should be auditing politicians to ensure they are not, in effect, selling special access to themselves in many of these situations, access that voters do not have, in clear violation of ethics rules, and possible violation of the Criminal Code.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
[email protected]

---

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign

With the birth of their son, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have unwittingly given the British government some breathing room in efforts to modernize royal succession laws.

Corporate sponsors and lobby groups are offering nearly $270,000 in funding, goods and services for the upcoming retreat of Canadian premiers this week in Niagara-on-the-Lake.