Elections Canada - Having problems interpreting the law

Looks like there may be someone else besides the CPC and Gerry Nicolls that has a difficult time accepting the notion of Elections Canada as some kind of infallible deity.

Licia Corbella describes her own run-ins with 'that independent government body' - Chief interpeter can't even interpret election ad laws (H/T to reader Frmgrl):

...The first three agents at Elections Canada's head office in Ottawa had never even heard about the advertising law and told me to call a 1-800 number.

When asked if it would be legal for me to pay for such an ad, one agent said: "Sounds fine with me. It's your money. You should be able to do whatever you want with it."

I agreed with her wholeheartedly. "So is that your answer?" I asked. "This is kind of important. After all, if I interpret this wrong, I could go to jail and get a criminal record."

That stumped her. Eventually, after being put on hold and speaking to close to one dozen Elections Canada staff members, most of whom didn't even know about the law, I was put through to a polite Elections Canada lawyer, who after a long conversation told me that he couldn't give me legal advice, just "legal information." His advice, or "information"? To hire a lawyer to figure it out. I'm not making this up!

( . . . )

While giving his evidence in chief, Kingsley said "third-party" individuals or groups had to be limited to spending no more than $3,000 in any given federal riding to a maximum of $150,000 during the election campaign or face criminal charges, large fines and even jail.

But when he was asked to interpret various scenarios -- like the one I presented to Elections Canada officials during the 2004 federal election -- he was unable or unwilling to interpret the law he says he helped frame and of which he was the self-described chief interpreter and enforcer...

And she gives her opinion of the current brouhaha:

...Just days after the election began, Andrew Kumpf sent an e-mail to Conservative party officials, wondering if the proposal to have Retail Media place ads on behalf of local candidates would violate the Canada Elections Act: "While our thinking is that this option would be legal, we are not certain beyond all reasonable doubt."

Is anyone? If the Tories sought clarity on election advertising from Elections Canada, like I did and the court did, they very likely got conflicting information, ambiguous information, no information or some "legal information" to call a lawyer.

The New Democrats did virtually the same thing as the Tories during that election campaign -- that is, they used national party funds to run national ads with just a local tagline at the end of the ad promoting the local candidate.

But Elections Canada hasn't raided the NDP's headquarters or the Liberals, who have engaged in the same practice in the past...

Wherever the truth may lie, the opposition parties will pursue this one as long as they can. However, I hardly think it has the impact of the sponsorship scandal on Joe Blow Canadian.

He's more concerned about his gas and food prices going up while his job disappears.

* * * *

Update: Just watching MDL. Did anyone else hear Buzz Hargrove suggest that the government can change the exchange rate? i.e. lower the value of the looney?

* * * *

Steve Janke has several great posts on the Elections Canada story:

Elections Canada Investigators' Manual

Elections Canada warrant makes no mention of interviews with senior Conservative officials

and Four questions concerning the search warrant.


And from the Colonist - Tory ads legal, organizer claims.

* * * *

BIG FRIDAY UPDATE: Actually, the Tories might have a point - Ottawa Citizen.

...What in there (Election Act) says local spending must happen locally or concern local issues? I see nothing.

Of course the courts might not agree with my interpretation. Or they may say the Tories did a legal thing but in a carelessly illegal way; one Liberal staffer suggested to me that the central problem was that local candidates did not technically "incur" the costs in question. Even if true, that claim hardly justifies Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc's reference to "an Enron-style accounting practice" at a Thursday press conference...