Ethics Commissioner has covered up twice already for Nigel Wright, Senate Ethics Officer is controlled by a Senate committee, Auditor General is failing to do audit, Elections Canada has secret, questionable enforcement record, and even the RCMP’s independence is questionable

---

This release was covered by the Huffington Post, VOCM Backtalk, and Ottawa Life on May 22, 2013

---

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch set out the details of why biased, lapdog investigations mean that a cover-up of the Senate expenses scandal is the most likely outcome, and why a public inquiry will likely be needed to ensure a full investigation.

Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy should be found guilty of violating federal ethics rules, but the fact that the same secretive, Conservative-controlled Senate Committee of Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration that watered down the conclusions in its initial report is still controlling the review of expenses is just the tip of the iceberg of investigation problems.

“The Conservatives caused the Senate scandal, but they and the Liberals, NDP and Bloc Quebecois are all to blame for the weak, biased or ineffective lapdogs who are investigating the scandal because they all failed during recent minority governments to choose strong watchdogs, and to pass measures to close loopholes and strengthen enforcement powers and requirements,” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.  “As a result, no one should be surprised if all the investigations cover-up the scandal, and if there is any evidence that this is happening an independent public inquiry will clearly be needed.”

Ethics Commissioner

Federal Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson is investigating Nigel Wright’s role in the scandal, but she has had a very weak enforcement record since 2007, including letting dozens of Conservatives off the hook for very questionable actions, and making more than 80 secret rulings.  Commissioner Dawson has also already covered up twice for Nigel Wright and could, as she has many times in the past, abandon her investigation secretly without issuing a public ruling (See details below in Backgrounder).

Because of section 66 added to the new Act by the Conservatives in 2006, the Ethics Commissioner’s rulings cannot be challenged in court if she has factual or legal errors in her rulings.  There are no mandatory penalties for violating the ethics rules in the Act.  As well, if Prime Minister Harper approves it, Commissioner Dawson’s term in office can be renewed for another seven years in 2014 so she has an incentive to please him

Overall, there is no reason to trust that Ethics Commissioner Dawson will do a full investigation or rule correctly, even though there is already enough clear, public evidence for her to find Nigel Wright guilty of violating at least one or more of sections 4, 5, 6(1), 8 of the Conflict of Interest Act because he used inside information to make the secret, clearly improper payment that furthered the interests of his (maybe) friend Mike Duffy during the audit of Senator Duffy’s expenses.

Senate Ethics Officer

The Senate Ethics Officer may investigate Senator Duffy’s role in the scandal, but the Ethics Officer is even more of a lapdog than the Ethics Commissioner because the Conflict of Interest Code for Senators puts the Officer under the control of a secretive, Conservative-controlled committee of senators who have the power to decide what the Code’s rules mean, how the rules will be applied, whether an investigation can even happen, and (along with the whole Senate) what the final ruling, and penalties, will be.

While the NDP has filed a complaint, in fact the Senate Ethics Officer can only investigate if the committee directs the Officer to investigate on its own or prompted by a complaint from a senator. (See details below in Backgrounder)

Overall, there is no reason to trust that the Senate committee will allow a full investigation, let alone a legally correct ruling, even though there is already enough clear public evidence to find Senator Duffy guilty of violating section 17.1 of the Code for taking the clearly prohibited gift of the payment of money from Nigel Wright.

The Ethics Officer does not have to issue a public ruling if the Officer’s conclusion is that no Code violations occurred.  Also, if Senator Duffy or any other senator resigns, any investigation is suspended forever unless the committee decides to continue it.

Auditor General

The Auditor General has full powers to audit Senate expenses under the Auditor General Act, (See details below in Backgrounder) and should have exercised those powers already, and should begin an audit immediately of all senators’ expenses, and also of all MPs’ expenses.

Elections Canada

The NDP has filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Canada Elections concerning the possibility that Senator Duffy’s claims of Senate expenses during the 2011 federal election may have covered costs that should have been covered by the Conservative Party, in violation of the Canada Elections Act.

The problem is that the Commissioner, in conjunction with the Director of Public Prosecutions, has a very secretive and questionable enforcement record, with more than 3,000 secret rulings since 1997, and many weak actions including a deal with the Conservative Party that let senators who participated in the Conservatives’ illegal in-and-out ad spending scheme during the 2006 federal election off the hook with no penalty.

RCMP

There are measures in the Parliament of Canada Act (s.16), and in the Criminal Code (s.119) that prohibit offering or giving any kind of benefit to a senator or other federal or provincial politician in return for any action or inaction by the politician.

There are media reports that allege that the payment by Nigel Wright to Senator Duffy was in return for cooperation by the senator, and the Senate committee reviewing Senator Duffy’s expenses, and the NDP has filed a request for investigation with the RCMP.

There are also media reports that the RCMP is looking into the Senate expenses violations generally to determine if any laws were broken.

The problem is that, in a widely criticized new policy, the RCMP Commissioner has aligned 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 policy affects the ability of the RCMP to make independent law enforcement decisions (See criticisms here, and here, and here).

– 30 –

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

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign, Enforce Fair Election Laws Campaign, Stop Fraud Politician Spending Campaign

---

BACKGROUNDER

Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson’s first cover-up for Nigel Wright

Commissioner Dawson’s first cover-up for Nigel Wright was her creation of an illegal, so-called ethics screen when Wright first took the job that violated the requirement in subsection 25(1) of the Conflict of Interest Act to make a public declaration within 60 days every time Wright recused himself from a decision-making process because of a conflict of interest.  This “screen” was supposedly enforced by the Deputy Chief of Staff. As a result of this cover-up, all of Wright’s recusals have been kept secret, and there is no way to tell if he ever failed to recuse himself as required by the Act.

Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson’s second cover-up for Nigel Wright

Commissioner Dawson’s second cover-up for Wright was when she abandoned her investigation last fall without issuing a notice, let alone a ruling, of whether Wright violated the Act by taking part in discussions of issues that affect Barrick Gold.  The Ethics Commissioner is allowed to do this under s. 45 of the Act.  The cover-up only came to light because Canadian Press journalist Joan Bryden pressed Commissioner Dawson to make a public statement about the case.  Commissioner Dawson’s statement failed to set out any reasons why she concluded that Wright had not violated the Act.

Conflict of Interest Act missing key rules

The Conservatives broke a 2006 election promise (one of their many broken accountability promises) to include key ethics rules in the new Conflict of Interest Act prohibiting dishonesty and being in even an appearance of a conflict of interest, as Prime Minister Harper instead put those rules in his Accountability Guide for ministers and other senior officials so he could ignore them (as he has since – see the rules in Annex A, Part 1 of the Guide).

Senate Ethics Officer is a lapdog controlled by a Senate committee

The Senate Ethics Officer is, under the Conflict of Interest Code for Senators, even more of a lapdog than the Ethics Commissioner because the Officer is essentially under the control of a committee of senators (ss.35 and 41(1)) that operates in secret (s.36), currently has a majority of Conservative members, and (among other powers) has the following powers:

• defines what the rules in the Code mean, and how they are applied by the Ethics Officer (subsection 37(2));
• controls whether the Ethics Officer can investigate a situation (s.44(1) and 44(8));
• if an investigation is approved, controls (along with the whole Senate) whether the Ethics Officer has access to “persons, papers, things and records” (s.44(13);
• can overrule the ruling of the Ethics Officer (s.46), although the Ethics Officer’s ruling must be made public (ss.45(2) to (3)), and;
• along with the whole Senate, decides whether a senator is guilty, and whether there will be any penalty (s.48).

The Senate Ethics Officer can only investigate if the committee directs the Ethics Officer to investigate on its own (ss.44(1) and 44(8)) or prompted by a complaint from a senator (s.44(2) and (3)).  The Ethics Officer can also abandon the investigation without issuing a public ruling or reasons if the Ethics Officer’s conclusion is that no Code violations occurred (s.45(4).

Finally, contrary to some recent media reports the Committee or the Ethics Officer may suspend an investigation and refer the situation to other authorities if they have reasonable evidence that a law has been violated, but they are not required to suspend the investigation (s.47).  If a senator resigns, any investigation into that senator’s actions is suspended forever unless the committee decides to continue it (s.49).

Auditor General

Auditor General Act (R.S., 1985, c. A-17)
POWERS AND DUTIES
Examination
5. The Auditor General is the auditor of the accounts of Canada, including those relating to the Consolidated Revenue Fund and as such shall make such examinations and inquiries as he considers necessary to enable him to report as required by this Act.
1976-77, c. 34, s. 5.

ACCESS TO INFORMATION
Access to information
13. (1) Except as provided by any other Act of Parliament that expressly refers to this subsection, the Auditor General is entitled to free access at all convenient times to information that relates to the fulfilment of his or her responsibilities and he or she is also entitled to require and receive from members of the federal public administration any information, reports and explanations that he or she considers necessary for that purpose.

Inquiries
(4) The Auditor General may examine any person on oath on any matter pertaining to any account subject to audit by him and for the purposes of any such examination the Auditor General may exercise all the powers of a commissioner under Part I of the Inquiries Act.
R.S., 1985, c. A-17, s. 13; 2003, c. 22, s. 90(E).

---

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign, Enforce Fair Election Laws Campaign, Stop Fraud Politician Spending Campaign

Voting system and lack of key promises for more democratic elections and government are likely reasons for turnout

---

This release was covered by The Tyee on May 17, 2013

---

Thursday, May 16, 2013

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch called for democratic changes to British Columbia’s political system in response to the clear crisis of low voter turnout in the provincial election.  Initial results show that the B.C. Liberals have won 50 of 85 seats with the support of only 22% of eligible voters.

“With just about half of eligible voters casting ballots yesterday, alarm bells should be going off and questions raised about the legitimacy of the provincial government,” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator for Democracy Watch.  “Voter turnout will go up if the voting system is changed and if the parties make changes to end undemocratic elections and government.”

The most important changes the B.C. 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 MLAs who switch parties in-between elections to resign and run in a by-election);
• change the voting system so that the percentage of MLAs each party receives more closely matches the popular vote percentages.

These two 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 MLAs elected and promises kept.

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

“More and more voters know from their experience of the past few decades of elections 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 have likely 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

Surveys show Canadians are unhappy with dangerously undemocratic, unaccountable, unethical and secretive Senate – shutting it down is the easiest and best option

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch launched a national letter-writing campaign calling on politicians from all parties across Canada to stop playing games and take immediate action to change the Constitution to shut down the Senate.

“Recent scandals show how dangerously undemocratic and unaccountable the Senate is, and overall it is easier, less costly, and best to shut down the Senate rather than reform it, especially since constitutional changes are required to do anything and prime ministers and senators have clearly failed for more than 145 to clean up the Senate in any meaningful way,” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.

There is debate around whether to reform or abolish the Senate and the Supreme Court has recently been asked to rule on whether reforming it requires a constitutional amendment.  The answer is likely “yes” and, as a result, shutting down the Senate will be clearly no more difficult than reforming it.

The many reasons for shutting down the Senate, and why a shut down is easier, less costly, and causes fewer problems than any possible reforms, are as follows:

1. The Senate is redundant:  The Senate does some good studies, but the Senate has not produced any report that contains anything significantly different than reports produced by privately funded independent think-tanks, NGOs, political parties, House of Commons Committees, the Library of Parliament etc.
2. The Senate is unnecessary:  The Senate is supposed to provide balanced regional representation, but that can be achieved by shutting down the Senate and adding seats to the House of Commons from the regions.  If you believe in the federation of Canada, representation in the House will never match population exactly (it never has and never will), so there is no real problem with adding seats from the regions to ensure the balance that the Senate is, in part, aimed at achieving.
3. The Senate is illegitimate and will remain inefficient:  Currently many senators are in their position for no other reason than they did favours for a prime minister.  Electing senators bit by bit over several years, if not decades, will cause a two-tier Senate, and eventually will give the Senate democratic legitimacy which means it will justifiably be able to cause legislative gridlock by blocking bills passed in the House of Commons.
4. The Senate is undemocratic and unaccountable in many other ways:  Even if changes are made to have elected senators, or have them serve fixed terms, the Senate will still be undemocratic with a secretive Board of Internal Economy; very weak ethics and expense rules that senators enforce themselves; weak penalties for violators (except sometimes when scandals are revealed); a lapdog Senate Ethics Officer under the control of a committee of senators; a requirement to have money and property to be a senator; and who knows what other problems that the Senate has been covering up, and failing to clean up, for more than 145 years.

To give just a few details about how unconcerned senators clearly are about fulfilling their supposed role to provide “sober second thought”, not only is the Senate Ethics Officer under the control of a committee of senators, but also violations of Senate ethics rules are not penalized in any way, and the rules:

• do not require senators to be honest, and allow senators to make decisions even if they have a financial interest in the outcome (as long as the decision applies generally to a broad group of people or organizations);
• do not allow conflicts of interest that senators have to be made public unless a senate committee approves it;
• allow senators to accept the gift of unlimited travel, even from lobbyists, and;
• allow senators to sit on the boards of businesses and so they can be essentially inside-government lobbyists for those businesses (given that, legally, directors are required to advance the interests of the business).

Democracy Watch will continue to run this campaign and to push for all parties to shut down the Senate until this key democratic reform happens.

– 30 –

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

---

Democracy Watch’s Shut Down the Senate Campaign

Despite high voter concern about democracy and trust, all parties fail to promise many needed changes to have effective democracy, government ethics and accountability in British Columbia

Friday, May 10, 2013

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch released its Report Card on the 2013 Democratic Good Government Election Platforms of the five main British Columbia political parties, the only election report card on these issues.

The Green Party receives a C- the best grade of bad overall grades in Report Card on British Columbia Parties’ Democratic Good Government Platforms — Conservatives receive a D-, NDP a D- and Liberals an F.  A Dishonesty Downgrade of one full grade is also shown in the Report Card results — usually only half of all promises are kept because of the lack of an honesty-in-politics law which is needed to effectively penalize promise-breakers and misleaders.

“All the B.C. parties have failed to respond to high voter concern about democracy and trust issues so the party leaders should not be surprised by the lack of support they will receive from voters on election day and no one should be surprised by likely low voter turnout,” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch and its four nation-wide coalitions. “One can only hope that the parties will actually address these concerns when the legislature opens again so that everyone in B.C. politics will finally be effectively required to act honestly, ethically, openly, representatively and to prevent waste.”

“Given the lack of a provincial honesty-in-politics law voters should be wary of trusting any political promises, but one good sign was that the B.C. Greens promised to enact such a measure, the first party to make such a promise in Canada,” said Duff Conacher, Founding Director of Democracy Watch.

The Report Card grades the four main parties’ platform pledges based upon 16 sets of key changes in five areas that Democracy Watch and its coalitions believe are the changes that will most effectively require everyone in the federal government to act honestly, ethically, openly, efficiently, representatively and, if they don’t act in these democratic ways, easily and thoroughly held accountable.  In total, the 16 sets of changes add up to 100 key changes needed to the British Columbia government’s democracy, ethics and accountability system.

The measures are a compilation of the proposals of the five nation-wide coalitions Democracy Watch coordinates (Government Ethics Coalition, Money in Politics Coalition, Open Government Coalition, Corporate Responsibility Coalition, Canadian Community Reinvestment Coalition).  A combined total of more than 140 citizen groups with a total membership of more than 3 million Canadians belong to the coalitions, groups that work on anti-poverty, bank accountability, community economic development, consumer, corporate responsibility, environment, labour, social justice, women and youth issues.

Many national surveys over the past several years have shown that a large majority of Canadians support the 100 democracy, ethics and government accountability reforms set out in the Report Card, as do many commentators on democratic reform.  The federal government, and every province and territory and municipality across Canada, all have a similar list of 100 loopholes and flaws in their government systems (each with a slightly different set of loopholes flaws, depending on which have been closed or corrected in the past).

The 16 sets of changes, divided into five areas, all reflect the following five key elements for ensuring that large, powerful government institutions act responsibly and follow rules: 1. strong laws with no loopholes; 2. requirement to disclose details of operations and violations; 3. fully independent, fully empowered watchdog agencies to enforce laws; 4. penalties that are high enough to encourage compliance; and 5. empowerment of citizens to hold governments and watchdog agencies accountable.

The parties were given a grade ranging from A (Platform makes clear promise to implement proposal) to I (Platform does not mention proposal), with grades B for a vague or partial promise to implement the proposal, C and D for clear to vague promises to explore the proposal, E for mentioning proposal and F for mentioning the theme of the proposal.  Grades were averaged for each of the five sections, and the averages of section grades were used to calculate the overall grade for each party.

Democracy Watch graded the parties’ election platforms by reviewing the platforms.  Statements by party leaders or representatives were not taken into account as they are not fully accessible to all voters, nor are they binding in any way on the party (as admitted by many party leaders) and as a result are even less reliable than promises made in the parties’ platforms.

– 30 –

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

British Columbia Conservative Party platform webpage – Party Policy document
Green Party of British Columbia platform webpage – Party Policy document
British Columbia Liberal Party platform webpage
British Columbia NDP platform webpage

---

Report Card on the 2013 Democratic Good Government
Election Platforms of the British Columbia Political Parties
(Set out below are quotations from the British Columbia parties’ platform documents upon which the Report Card grades were based for each of the 16 sub-categories graded in the five issue areas categories)

GRADING SYSTEM
A – Platform makes clear promise to implement proposal
B – Platform makes vague or partial promise to implement proposal
C – Platform makes clear promise to explore proposal
D – Platform makes vague or partial promise to explore proposal
E – Platform mentions proposal
F – Platform mentions theme of proposal
I – Platform does not mention proposal

British Columbia Conservative Party platform webpage – Party Policy document
Green Party of British Columbia platform webpage – Party Policy document
British Columbia Liberal Party platform webpage
British Columbia NDP platform webpage

---

OVERALL REPORT CARD GRADES
best to worst

* Dishonesty Downgrade applied because past performance of all parties shows that they usually break half their promises, and the lack of an honesty-in-politics law means they can’t be held accountable.

---

---

I. Honest, Ethical Government Measures

SECTION I OVERALL GRADES
Conservative Party – E
Green Party – D
Liberal Party – I
New Democrat Party – E-

1. Requiring honesty-in-politics – Pass a law that requires all Cabinet ministers, MLAs, political staff, Cabinet appointees and government employees (including at Crown corporations, agencies, boards, commissions, courts and tribunals) nomination race and election candidates to tell the truth, with an easily accessible complaint process to a fully independent watchdog agency that is fully empowered to investigate and penalize anyone who lies. (Go to Honesty in Politics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – B
– Pledge to “. . . introduce voters’ rights legislation that requires political parties to live up to their election platforms. Platforms would be submitted to Elections BC and posted publicly. An audit conducted between elections would report on how well the political parties meet their commitments” (Governance platform backgrounder)” and to “Require that all political parties participating in an election declare their election platforms to Elections BC three weeks before the election date; Establish an Independent Platform Commissioner to perform an audit between elections and issue a report to the public; Have Elections BC post the declared platforms online, with one hard copy available at each public library and each Service BC location, no less than two weeks before the election date” (p.38 of policy document)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

2. Strengthening ethics standards for politicians, political staff, Cabinet appointees and government employees, and ethics enforcement – Close the loopholes in the existing ethics rules (including closing the loophole that allows Cabinet ministers, MLAs, their staff and Cabinet appointees to be involved in decisions in which they have a financial interest, and including requiring resignation and a by-election if an MLA switches parties between elections) and apply them to all government institutions (including all Crown corporations), and as proposed by the federal Department of Finance place anyone with decision-making power on the anti-corruption watch list of the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (Fintrac) so deposits to their bank accounts can be tracked, and; strengthen the independence and effectiveness of all the newly created politician and government employee ethics watchdog positions (the Integrity Commissioner for Cabinet and MLAs and lobbyists, the Conflict of Interest Commissioner for government employees) by giving opposition party leaders a veto over appointees, having the legislature (as opposed to Cabinet) approve their annual budgets, prohibiting the watchdogs from giving secret advice, requiring them to investigate and rule publicly on all complaints (including anonymous complaints), fully empowering and requiring them to penalize rule-breakers, changing all the codes they enforce into laws, and ensuring that all their decisions can be reviewed by the courts.  (Go to Government Ethics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

3. Making the political donations system democratic – Prohibit secret, unlimited donations of money, property or services by anyone for any reason to nomination and party leadership candidates (only such donations are now only prohibited if given to election candidates); limit loans, including from financial institutions, to parties and all types of candidates to the same level as donations are limited; require disclosure of all donations (including the identity of the donor’s employer (as in the U.S.) and/or major affiliations) and loans quarterly and before any election day; limit spending on campaigns for the leadership of political parties; maintain limits on third-party (non-political party) advertising during elections; lower the public funding of political parties from $2 per vote received to $1 per vote received for parties that elect more MLAs than they deserve based on the percentage of voter support they receive (to ensure that in order to prosper these parties need to have active, ongoing support of a broad base of individuals) and; ensure riding associations receive a fair share of this per-vote funding (so that party headquarters don’t have undue control over riding associations).  (Go to Money in Politics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B+
– Party policy is to “2.1.12. Enact legislation relating to political donations to registered British Columbia political parties, limiting such donations to those received only from individuals and banning donations from corporations, unions and all other similar entities” (p.5 of policy document)

Green Party – B+
– Pledge to “. . . implement electoral finance reform to cap the amount of money that can be donated, to restrict donations to British Columbians and to get rid of corporate and union donations” (Governance platform backgrounder) and to “Implement campaign finance reform that limits political donations from any one organization or individual to $2,000 per political party per year; Institute an annual subsidy of $2 per vote per year until the next election for any political party receiving at least 10% of the total votes cast in an election. This public subsidy is to compensate parties for the loss of union and corporate donations” (p.39 of policy document)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – B-
– Pledge to “End corporate and union donations to political parties, and refer related issues to an all-party committee, including parties which are not represented in the Legislature” (p.47 of platform)

4. Closing down the revolving door – Prohibit lobbyists from working for government departments or serving in senior positions for political parties or candidates for public office (as in New Mexico and Maryland), and from having business connections with anyone who does, and close the loopholes so that the actual cooling-off period for former Cabinet ministers, ministerial staff and senior public officials is five years (and three years for MLAs, senators, their staff, and government employees) during which they are prohibited from becoming a lobbyist or working with people, corporations or organizations with which they had direct dealings while in government.  Make the Integrity Commissioner and Conflict of Interest Commissioner more independent and effective by by giving opposition party leaders a veto over their appointment, by having the legislature (as opposed to Cabinet) approve their annual budget, by prohibiting the Commissioners from giving secret advice, by requiring the Commissioners to investigate and rule publicly on all complaints (including anonymous complaints), and by fully empowering and requiring the Commissioners to penalize rule-breakers, by ensuring all decisions of the Commissioners can be reviewed by the courts. (Go to Government Ethics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Top

Top of Report Card

Top of Report Card Background Details

---

II. Open Government Measures

SECTION II OVERALL GRADES
Conservative Party – E
Green Party – C-
Liberal Party – I
New Democrat Party – E-

5. Strengthening access-to-information system – Strengthen the federal access-to-information law and government information management system by applying the law to all government/publicly funded institutions, requiring all institutions and officials to create records of all decisions and actions and disclose them proactively and regularly, creating a public interest override of all access exemptions, giving opposition party leaders a veto over the appointment of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, having the legislature (as opposed to Cabinet) approve the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s annual budgets, and giving the Information and Privacy Commissioner the power and mandate to order changes to government institutions’ information systems, and to penalize violators of access laws, regulations, policies and rules.  (Go to Open Government Campaign and Stop Muzzling Scientists Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B
– Party policy is to “2.1.8. Establish a truly open and comprehensive Freedom of Information Act which would be reflective of costs of delivery of such services.” (p.3 of party policy document) and to “2.1.9. Ensure that salaries and expenses of MLAs, Cabinet ministers and all senior officials of the government are made public annually and are easily accessible to all British Columbians” (p.4)

Green Party – A-
– Pledge in party policy document to “Make government information easier and less costly to access” (p.38 of policy document) and to “Make Freedom of Information (FOI) requests more affordable and responses more timely” and to “Establish the administrative legal requirement for detailed documentation in key decisions of government” and to “Establish appropriate penalties of noncompliance in the duty to document” and to “Amend FIPPA to empower the Commissioner to investigate the inappropriate destruction of government documents” (p.38)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – C+
– Pledge to “Restore openness and accountability — Strengthen Freedom of Information laws . . .” (p.47 of platform)

6. Exposing behind-closed-door communications – Require in a new law that Ministers and public officials and MLAs and their staff disclose their contacts with all lobbyists, whether paid or volunteer lobbyists.  (Go to Government Ethics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

7. Strengthening lobbying disclosure and ethics, and the enforcement system – Strengthen the Lobbying Registration Act by including in it a Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct, by closing the loophole that currently allows corporations to hide the number of people involved in lobbying activities, and by requiring lobbyists to disclose their past work with any Canadian or foreign government, political party or candidate, to disclose all their government relations activities (whether paid or volunteer) involving gathering inside information or trying to influence policy-makers (as in the U.S.) and to disclose the amount they spend on lobbying campaigns (as in 33 U.S. states), and; strengthen the ethics and enforcement system by extending the limitation period for prosecutions of violations of the Act to 10 years, and; by giving opposition party leaders a veto over the appointment of the Integrity Commissioner for lobbyists, by having the legislature (as opposed to Cabinet) approve the Commissioner’s annual budget, by prohibiting the Commissioner from giving secret advice, by requiring the Commissioner to investigate and rule publicly on all complaints (including anonymous complaints), by fully empowering and requiring the Commissioner to penalize rule-breakers, by ensuring all Commissioner decisions can be reviewed by the courts.  (Go to Government Ethics Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – C-
– Pledge to “Require that all lobbyists declare their lobby status when providing information and recommendations to public agents” (p.38 of policy document)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Top

Top of Report Card

Top of Report Card Background Details

---

III. Efficient Government Measures

SECTION III OVERALL GRADES
Conservative Party – B+
Green Party – E
Liberal Party – E
New Democrat Party – C-

8. Increasing powers of Auditor General – Increase the independence of the Auditor General by requiring approval of appointment from opposition party leaders; increase auditing resources of the Auditor General by having the legislature (as opposed to Cabinet) approve the Auditor General’s annual budget, and; empower the Auditor General to audit all government institutions and also audit projected spending (like the federal Parliamentary Budget Officer does), to make orders for changes to government institutions’ spending systems, and empower the Auditor General to penalize violators of Treasury Board spending rules or Auditor General orders or requests for information.  (Go to Stop Fraud Politician Spending Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B+
– Pledge to create a new Legislative Budget Office with the same powers as the federal Parliamentary Budget Officer, but more independent, to provide MLAs with assessments of proposed government spending (p. 22 of platform), and also pledge to increase scrutiny of the government budget by MLAs through committee hearings in the fall (p.23 of platform), and also party policy pledges to increase spending accountability in various ways (p.3 and p.5-6 of policy document)

Green Party – D
– Pledge to “. . . cap the compensation level of senior executives in ministries, Crown corporations and other public bodies established by acts of the legislature (universities, health authorities, etc.) to reflect a reasonable salary for public service. We do not subscribe to comparisons with the private sector or with private sector compensation strategies like bonuses. The income of the highest paid employee in a ministry or Crown corporation will be tied to the lowest paid employee on a ten to one ratio” and that “We believe in lean government and guarantee that there will be no more executives than needed by reviewing the number of executive positions of all public bodies” (Governance platform backgrounder)

Liberal Party – D
– Pledge to work with the Assembly to have an independent annual audit of spending by the Assembly (p. 73 of platform) and to protect with legal measures a proposed B.C. Prosperity Fund from being used to pay for wasteful government initiatives (p. 78 of platform)

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

9. Restricting government and campaign advertising – Empower a government watchdog agency to preview and prohibit government advertising contracting out if there is no reason to have the advertising developed by a contractor, and to restrict all advertising by the government and opposition parties and third parties in the six-month period leading up to an election.  (Go to Stop Fraud Politician Spending Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B+
– Party policy is to “4.2.2. Advertising programs for government departments, Crown corporations, and all other organizations owned, controlled or supported by the Government of British Columbia, should be limited to nationally-competitive areas such as tourism promotion, and to those instances where there is a clear requirement to inform the public” (p.6 of the policy document)

Green Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – B+
– Pledege to “Ban taxpayer-funded partisan advertising, and pass legislation to ensure all government advertising is reviewed and approved by the Auditor General. (p.47 of the platform)

Top

Top of Report Card

Top of Report Card Background Details

---

IV. Representative, Citizen-Driven Government Measures

SECTION IV OVERALL GRADES
Conservative Party – E
Green Party – B+
Liberal Party – E
New Democrat Party – D

10. Increasing meaningful public consultation – Pass a law requiring all government departments and institutions to use consultation processes that provide meaningful opportunities for citizen participation, especially concerning decisions that affect the lives of all British Columbians.  (Go to Voter Rights Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B-
– Pledge to consult with a variety of stakeholders about a variety of policies throughout the platform and party policy document, and party policy is to “2.2.3. Amending current legislation so that municipalities are required to hold referenda for borrowing for capital projects and to ensure the “alternative approval process”, also known as the “counter-petition” process, is prohibited. (p. 4 of policy document)

Green Party – B+
– Pledge to consult in a variety of policy areas and sectors in their platform backgrounders, and specifically to “. . . decentralizing decision-making and to expanding the authority of local governments. We will propose new funding formulas for municipal and regional governments. By transferring power and resources, the Green Party of British Columbia would strengthen the role of local government. We would implement elected Regional Resource Management Boards, Regional Health Trusts, and Local Social Trusts that would have local government representation” (Governance platform backgrounder)” and to “Require that all-party parliamentary committees hold public hearings on draft legislation” (p.38 of policy document) and to “Amend the Initiative and Recall Act to add clarity related to conduct, decision-making, and criteria for both Initiative and Recall and to make this an effective tool for both citizens and legislators” (p.38)

Liberal Party – C-
– Pledge to consult with a variety of stakeholders about a variety of policies throughout the platform.

New Democrat Party – B-
– Pledge to consult with a variety of stakeholders about a variety of policies throughout the platform, and to “. . . empower legislative committees to undertake meaningful consultation with British Columbians (p. 47 of platform) and to “3. Improve local autonomy: – Recognize local governments as an independent, responsible and accountable order of government, and empower them to enact municipal finance reform. Repeal the Significant Project Streamlining Act, end the P3 requirement for projects over $50 million, and reinstate local decision making on the creation of resort municipalities. Reform TransLink to allow elected municipal representation on the decision-making board (p. 47)

11. Restricting power of Cabinet to make appointments – Require approval by opposition party leaders for the approximately 2,000 judicial, agency, board, commission and tribunal appointments currently made by the Premier, especially for appointees to senior and law enforcement positions, after a merit-based nomination and screening process.   (Go to Democratic Voting Systems Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – A
– Pledge to “. . . create an independent office to appoint board members to public bodies and crown corporations” (Governance platform backgrounder)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

12. Making the legislature more democratic – Change the law to restrict the Premier’s power to shut down (prorogue) the legislature to only for a very short time, and only for an election (dissolution) or if the national situation has changed significantly or if the Premier can show that the government has completed all their pledged actions from the last Speech from the Throne (or attempted to do so, as the opposition parties may stop or delay completion of some actions).  Give all party caucuses the power to choose which MLAs and senators in their party sits on legislature committees, and allow any MLA to introduce a private member bill at any time, and define what a “vote of confidence” is in the law in a restrictive way so most votes in the legislature are free votes. (Go to Democratic Voting Systems Campaign and Stop Muzzling MPs Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – B+
– Pledge to “. . . strengthen the role of the individual Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) including the use free votes and strengthening the importance of committees. We will reduce the concentration of power in the Premier’s office” (Governance platform backgrounder) and to “Institute a system of free votes in the Legislature for all matters, including the budget. The BC Greens will not “whip” party members” (p.38 of policy document) and to “Delegate to committees the power to modify the legislation and to have the modified version considered in the Legislature” (p.38) and to “Establish fixed dates for sittings of the Legislature (p.38)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

13. Ensuring free, fair and representative elections – Change the current voting law and system (the Elections Act) to specifically restrict the Premier’s power to call an unfair snap election, so that election dates are fixed as much as possible under the parliamentary system.  Change the Act also so that nomination and party leadership races are regulated by Elections British Columbia (including limiting spending on campaigns for party leadership), so that Elections British Columbia determines which parties can participate in election debates based upon merit criteria, so that party leaders cannot appoint candidates except when a riding does not have a riding association, so that voters can give a reason if they decline their ballot (ie. vote for “none of the above”) and so Elections British Columbia is required to educate voters about their legal right to decline their ballot, and to provide a more equal number of voters in every riding, and a more accurate representation in the legislature of the actual voter support for each political party (with a safeguard to ensure that a party with low-level, narrow-base support does not have a disproportionately high level of power in the legislature).  (Go to Democratic Voting Systems Campaign and Stop Fraud Robocalls Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – B+
– Pledge to “change the voting system from First Past the Post” (Governance platform backgrounder) and to “Require by law that political parties use democratic means to nominate candidates and that these democratic processes are made public” (p.38 in policy document) and to “Appoint an Independent Debates Commission to ensure fair rules for the televised Leaders’ debates

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – C
– Pledge to “Increase youth voter turnout by lowering the voter registration age to 16″ (p. 47 of platform)” and to “Move the next provincial election to the fall of 2017 so voters will have complete and accurate information about provincial finances.

Top

Top of Report Card

Top of Report Card Background Details

---

V. General Government Accountability Measures

SECTION V OVERALL GRADES
Conservative Party – D
Green Party – C-
Liberal Party – D-
New Democrat Party – C-

14. Facilitating citizen watchdog groups over government – Require provincial government institutions to enclose one-page pamphlets periodically in their mailings to citizens inviting citizens to join citizen-funded and directed groups to represent citizen interests in policy-making and enforcement processes of key government departments (for example, on ethics, spending, and health care) as has been proposed in the U.S. and recommended for Canadian banks and other financial institutions in 1998 by a federal task force, a legislature of Commons Committee, and a Senate Committee.  (Go to Citizen Association Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

15. Ensuring effective whistleblower protection – Require everyone to report any violation of any law, regulation, policy, code, guideline or rule, and require all watchdog agencies over government (for example: Auditor General, Information and Privacy Commissioner, Integrity Commissioner, and Conflict of Interest Commissioner) to investigate and rule publicly on allegations of violations, to penalize violators, to protect anyone (not just employees) who reports a violation (so-called “whistleblowers”) from retaliation, to reward whistleblowers whose allegations are proven to be true, and to ensure a right to appeal to the courts.  (Go to Open Government Campaign for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

Green Party – B-
– Pledge to “Introduce effective “whistle-blower” legislation” (p.38 of policy document)

Liberal Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

New Democrat Party – I
– Nothing related to proposal in platform

16. Ensuring loophole free laws and strong penalties for wrongdoers – Close any technical and other loopholes that have been identified in laws, regulations, policies, codes, guidelines and rules (especially those regulating government institutions and large corporations) to help ensure strong enforcement, and increase financial penalties for violations to a level that significantly effects the annual revenues/budget of the institution or corporation. (Go to Democracy Watch’s Campaigns for details about Democracy Watch’s proposals)

Conservative Party – B
– Pledge to strengthen funding for provincial justice system (p.10 of platform), and to increase accountability in the education system (p.15) and state that they believe social responsibility for businesses, and “in equality of opportunity in the workplace, in political institutions, and in society” (p.18 of platform, and p.20 of the policy document); and also pledge in the party policy document to increase accountability in the health care system (pp.7-8 of policy document), the education system (pp.8-9), in some areas of environmental protection (p.10) and natural resources (pp.12-15), in the justice system (p.10)

Green Party – B-
– Pledge to strengthen accountability in a variety of areas of society in their platform — http://www.greenparty.bc.ca/backgrounders — and in their policy document — http://www.greenparty.bc.ca/greenbook — including health care system, environmental protection system, energy, mining, transportation, agriculture and forestry sectors

Liberal Party – C-
– Pledge to strengthen access to justice in a variety of areas (pages. 56-60 of platform) and to strengthen environmental protections in some areas

New Democrat Party – B-
– Pledge to strengthen worker rights laws (pp. 31-33 of the platform) as well as environmental laws (pp. 39-42 of the platform) and to “Conduct a judicial inquiry into the sale of BC Rail” (p. 47).

---

Top

Top of Report Card

Democracy Watch’s Campaigns