Robocall Scandal: It can happen again

Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand warns that the robocall scandal that plagued the 2011 election with misleading phone calls is on track to be repeated if tough new rules and punishments are not put in place. Will this be the "tough on crime" Conservatives' time to shine or yet another pitfall where they fall flat on their rhetoric?

"Given the time it takes for the parliamentary process to follow its due course, we need to act sooner than later on these matters," Marc Mayrand said Thursday, a day after a report was released suggesting ways to prevent a repeat of the robocall scandal.

"My preference would be to have legislation in place by the end of 2014."

The legislation Mayrand is referring to, in reference to the report, should create tough penalties for impersonating election officials, wider investigation powers and more privacy for voters.

"My fear is that we see a re-occurrence of issues that we saw in the last general election, that further undermined electors' confidence and breeds disengagement and cynicism among electors," Mayrand said.

Conservative Minister for Democratic Reform Tim Uppal said the government would consider the report's recommendations.

However, let's not forget that the investigation into the robocall scandal has focused primarily on the Conservative party who shrugged its existence, blamed the opposition, and lost sight of its tough on crime principles. Regardless who is responsible, a "tough on crime" government should not take accusations lightly and should be eager to jump on these kind of crimes to profess their innocence and remain consistent with their purpose on the national stage. The Conservatives did neither. They dodged accusations and gave off the vibe of guilt through their actions. 

They shot down calls for a public inquiry and they maintain the fight against a full blown investigation. For a party that claims it was wrongly accused, the guilt couldn't have been more clearly demonstrated.

Here's hoping the Conservatives finally live up to their rhetoric and start introducing tough measures to deal with electoral fraud, rather than treat their MPs mistakes as a bid for campaigning. As we look at Peter Penashue who recently resigned after receiving 28 illegal donations, we see a man with so little regret over his actions that not only is PM Harper supporting his bid for re-election, they are campaigning in Labrador way before a date for any byelection was even called. Imagine what the Conservatives would have said to a Liberal in 2005 who said that despite making a mistake, the minister delivered and should deserve a second chance - don't forget the way the Conservatives condemned the Liberals for Sponsorship which is child's play in comparison to election fraud.

What do you think of the Conservatives' double standard on crime? Do you trust that they will live up to their rhetoric or is the Chief Electoral Officer's concerns legitimate and will follow through? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

For more coverage on the Ongoing Robocall Scandal, you can follow this feed.

Robocall Scandal – To date

Tory interference prompts resignation of Living Today editor

Some of the Filipino media in British Columbia has been taken by Conservative Party members, introducing the opportunity for interference and influence. This has led one alarmed editor, Yul Baritugo from Living Today to resign after his publisher, Reyfort Media Group CEO Reyfort Fortaleza, joined the fold. Is the integrity of Canadian media at stake?


Here is a brief look at some of the media outlets that are being run by Conservative members.

• Living Today: Run by Reyfort Fortaleza, published a piece about joining the party and an interview with PM Harper.
• Philippine Journal: Run by Irene Yatco, ran unsuccessfully against NDP MP Libby Davies in 2011.
• Planet Philippines: Run by Cholo Insua, who states it doesn't influence his work.

Baritugo resigned and in an alarmed fashion stated that the integrity of his former publication is at risk due to the publisher's recent decision to join the Conservative party and publish a piece on the third page in the Publisher's dedicated section.

Fortaleza wrote the piece: “Why I joined the Conservative Party”. In it he stated:

“On February 9, 2013, I formally joined the ranks of the Conservative Party of Canada. In many ways, it was an affirmation of the core values I hold deeply. Love for family. Dedication to hard work. Personal responsibility. Respect for tradition. Honour of faith...It isn't surprising that Canadians have voted Conservative for the last three elections, seeing in the party a reflection of the values they hold dear.”

A picture of Cely Fortaleza, PM Stephen Harper, and Publisher Reyfort Fortaleza in Living Today

The cover of that issue featured a glossy photo of Harper with the tag line: “Harper: Canada stronger than ever.”

While the profile isn't new to the magazine, as it has been done for BC politicians Premier Christy Clark and NDP leader Adrian Dix, the way it was handled is different. The other profiles were always assigned to a writer and not the publisher.

A look at the formatting of the interview that was written and published by Living Today's publisher.

Baritugo said he was initially assigned to write the article but Fortaleza took over. The magazine's creative director Mel Tobias said no writer was assigned on the day the interview was to take place and the Prime Minister's Office requested Fortaleza be the one to conduct the interview.

"I usually distribute the jobs to different people to get a chance for the front cover, but the office of Mr. Harper requested that Mr. Fortaleza be the one," Tobias said. 

It is no surprise the PMO opted for Fortaleza given the his ties to the Conservative party, signing his membership in the presence of Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney after being rewarded the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal last month.

“When you declare membership with the party, it goes to show that contrary views may no longer appear in that space,” Baritugo said. “It’s different if [Fortaleza] had distanced himself from the professional operation and did not include the entire operation of the company. But he did not.” 

Baritugo has always been critical of the Conservative government. In March 2011, he wrote a piece on the Harper Government's policies, criticizing their plans from prison expansion to immigration policies arguing they would make reunification of Filipino families difficult.

He believes the interview with the publisher was part of a broader Conservative strategy to court the ethnic vote.

"You have to remember ethnic media is fair game only if the Tories believe it can turn out physical votes at game time," he said.

While Fortaleza refused to comment to the Vancouver Observer on whether his membership would slant the neutral publication, Tobias said that the publisher's politics would stay out of the publication.

"It was just a coincidence that Mr. Fortaleza signed up, and it so happened that Mr. Harper was on the cover," Tobias explained. He emphasized that Living Today was a lifestyle magazine, intended to showcase the lives of global Filipinos, and not meant to be political.

However, it is worth refuting Tobias considering the publisher's piece on joining the Conservative party and his interview with Harper speaks volumes on that point.

Tobias criticized Baritugo's op-ed of 2011 stating it had "repercussions" on the publication  notably a letter from a reader who happens to be a Conservative supporter. Baritugo defended himself stating he would criticize any government regardless of the party.

"I'm not a card-carrying member of any party," Baritugo said.

"[Living Today] is publicly positioned as a lifestyle magazine but my columns - the odd man out - had always had either an economic angle, a political slant or bias," Baritugo said. He stated that the slant of the publisher would change the nature of the magazine.

Canadian media should be unbias and it is alarming to see a partisan takeover of media. It is no surprise the Conservatives would take this kind of approach to outreach considering the millions of taxpayer dollars they spend on airing Action Plan ads, even well after the Action Plan ended and the pre-writ attack ads they aired against Michael Ignatieff and Thomas Mulcair.

What do you think of this report? Are other media sites being partisanly owned at the moment and does that pose an issue to the legitimacy of the news and messaging we receive on a daily basis that serve as being critical to our decision-making process in elections? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Conservative backbenchers revolt against Harper

Harper's centralization of communications and operations has left some backbench Conservative MPs feeling like they have no say, sparking a mini revolt among MPs. Harper's control has kept his government out of hot water in a country that doesn't connect with right wing ideas, but it has also went against the principle of representative democracy, which gives each MP a right to represent the people who elect them.


Last Tuesday, Conservative backbench MPs Mark Warawa and Leon Benoit rose in the House of Commons to ask Speaker Andrew Scheer to rule that because the party leadership prevented them from speaking about controversial topics, that their privileges as MPs had been violated.

The friction grew as other backbench MPs agreed with Warawa's push to reopen the abortion debate where his stance was to condemn it. Harper has repeatedly and publicly said the abortion debate wouldn't be reopened.

"The Canadian Parliament is based on rules, responsibilities and privileges," Warawa said.

"Each of us has that responsibility to represent our communities, the people who elected us. We need to have those rights to be ensured that we have the opportunity to properly represent our communities."

Benoit joined the chorus his colleague started.

"I too feel that my rights have been infringed on by members of the party because I am not allowed to speak on certain topics in S. O. 31s," he said.

However, after the last caucus meeting, these MPs changed their tunes. 

"We had a really good caucus meeting and the prime minister has shown his usual really good leadership, and I appreciate that. He's a great leader," Benoit said.

Harper has many tools available to deal with malcontent and internal conflicts. He can banish MPs like he did with Helena Guergis and he can define who speaks in Parliament and he can refuse to sign nomination papers for those who want to run again as Conservative MPs. 

However, despite Harper's attempts to censor the movement to reopen the abortion debate, or any motions that are related to the controversial topics, the message is getting across. Warawa and at least 4 other backbench MPs collected signatures in a petition to allow their talking point on sex-selection abortion to be allowed.

For those outside the Conservative party looking at the tactics and initiatives that they take, we see there is a rift forming in the Conservative party and it is directly related, in this case, to the leadership of the party. It will be interesting to watch the hierarchy deal with malcontent and it will be interesting to see if Harper places more or less control over the talking points of his MPs, particularly the backbenchers who have nothing to lose by either revolting or leaving the Conservative party to be independents or form a new party. 

So what do you think of divisions within the Conservative party? Are they small and easy to resolve or structural and could lead to bigger conflicts in the future? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Budget 2013: Harper's hidden tax hikes

Expect prices on all goods to rise as the Conservatives increase tariffs on everything imported from China and India. The hidden tax will likely be overlooked until it hits your pocketbooks as the Conservatives advertise the removal in tariffs for hockey and baby equipment. However, don't be fooled, the 'low tax' mantra of the Conservatives, desperately being portrayed here is nothing but a lie. Taxes will go up, just you won't see it directly. Expect the Canada-US price gap to grow even further.

Analysts state that the Conservatives' "graduating" of 72 "emerging" companies to "developed" will mean tariff hikes and as a result, higher prices for consumers.

Analysts say that when these prices go up, hockey and baby clothing prices, which are supposed to see a 3% drop in prices, will rise with them and the savings won't even show.

Harper's tariff changes will lower the prices of 37 items for the short term while provoking massive price increases for thousands of others says Mike Moffatt, a professor at the Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario.

As an example, tariff changes will lead to the following price increases on the following types of products:

Examples of Tariff Increases

• Bicycles:                                                                         Current: 8.5% New: 13.0%

• Venetian Blinds:                                                              Current: 3.0% New: 7.0%

• Table fans:                                                                      Current: 2.5% New: 8.0%

• Tableware:                                                                      Current: 3.0% New: 6.5%

• Umbrellas:                                                                       Current: 5.0% New: 7.0%

• Potato starch:                                                                  Current: 5.0% New: 10.5%

The government expects to raise $333 million by these tariff hikes while expecting to lose $72 million for eliminating tariffs on hockey equipment - purely as a distraction.

"They are basically giving us a dollar and taking back five. It's a bit of a shell-game," Moffatt said.

There isn't a full list of products that will be effected but South Korea sells a lot of cars in Canada and their tariffs are expected to increase as well. Electronics, clothing, appliances and all essential needs are also expected to take a hit.

Bank of Montreal chief economist Doug Porter said that Conservative tariff policy will widen the price-gap between Canada and the US that sees American prices be much lower than Canadian prices on common goods when the dollar is at parity. This move would make Canadian prices more expensive and lead to more people fleeing to the American border.

"One wonders if this doesn't potentially lead to even more of a problem on the price gap. I have to wonder if this isn't taking from one hand and piling on to the other... aggravating cross-border shopping," he said.

Analysts also say the tariff hikes could be used as a trading maneuver to force these countries to give something in exchange for lower tariffs but the same can be done with their current rates.

Flaherty noted the changes as an experiment, but has an about face when it comes to lowering tariffs.

"We chose a few items so we can watch and see what happens to consumer prices," he explained. "If it works there are other tariffs we can reduce over time."

One can imagine that Flaherty would be good at lowering tariffs after raising them to get publicity for a 'low-tax' election campaign.

For free market Conservatives, tariffs pose as a protectionist measure and are seen as regressive to good business. However, this isn't the first regressive interference the Conservatives made on the market. Earlier this week, Flaherty told banks to hold off on mortgage rate cuts and Manulife listened as it planned to compete with the Bank of Montreal.

Do you still regard the Conservatives as the "low tax", pro-free-market option? Join us and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Controversy surrounds Mulcair's visit to Washington

NDP leader Thomas Mulcair and Prime Minister Stephen Harper are exchanging fire over speeches Mulcair recently made to the business community in Washington and New York that outlines a critical view of the current direction of the current government. Harper claims Mulcair is "trash talking" Canada while Mulcair points to Harper's past. Meanwhile, how true is Mulcair's pitch about the banking system?

Harper has accused Mulcair of "trash talking" Canada at the conference and Mulcair has fired back saying that he has nothing to learn from Harper about that.

"All of a sudden there's a rule that they've decided that you're not supposed to talk about the government (while abroad) now that they're the government but when they were the Opposition there was no problem talking about the government," Mulcair said. 

"So people can take that with a grain of salt."

Oh the irony, Harper's track record of remarks is quite insulting to most Canadians and cannot come close to matching Mulcair's concerns about the XL Pipeline deal.

When Harper was the official Opposition to Jean Chretien's Liberal government, he co-wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal in 2003 which called Chretien's stand against the war in Iraq as a "serious mistake."

"For the first time in history, the Canadian government has not stood beside its key British and American allies in their time of need," he wrote.

We remember that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq and the price of the war entered the trillions. 

In Montreal, Harper gave his notorious speech to American businessmen painting Canada as "a northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term."

Mulcair's speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington didn't have the sharp tongue that Harper had as official opposition back in the day, but its factual basis can be torn apart.

“Canada was not immune to the siren call of financial deregulation that swept across the rest of the developed world just over a decade ago. In the 1990’s, Canada’s Liberal and Conservative parties alike joined the chorus. It was only New Democrats who held the anchor tight against the calls for radical deregulation,” Mulcair said.

It is worth noting that the NDP of the time voted with the Reform to reject the changes that the Liberal government made which kept our banks out of the same kind of deregulated trouble that exists in the United States today.

On April 26, 1993, the NDP joined the Reform Party to vote against granting the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions new powers to enhance the safety and soundness of the Canadian financial system as was proposed by Bill C-15, Division 39.

On February 13, 2001, the NDP stood alone to vote against Bill C-8 Division 7 which proposed the creation of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada.

During the early 1990s and early 2000s, the NDP actually endorsed the American-style banking system and pushed for it in the House of Commons and in their platforms - take for example the platform of 1997.

“Canada’s NDP say it’s time to stand up to the banks on behalf of consumers and small business people. We will fight for: A Community Reinvestment Act, similar to laws already in effect in the United States.”

National Bureau of Economic Research, a leading American think tank, reviewed the Community Reinvestment Act and published a report in October 2012 called "Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?" In it, the risk-level of such a system to the economy was assessed.

“Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending? Yes, it did…. We find that adherence to the act led to riskier lending by banks: in the six quarters surrounding the CRA exams lending is elevated on average by about 5 percent every quarter and loans in these quarters default by about 15 percent more often. These patterns are accentuated in CRA-eligible census tracts and are concentrated among large banks.”

While Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair attack each other about their speeches as former and current Official Opposition leaders, one thing is clear: neither were right at the time and neither are right now.

So that leaves the question to you: Do you think both Harper and Mulcair are wrong over the way they handled Mulcair's business trip to Washington this week? 

Penashue accepted 28 illegal donations in last election

Conservative MP Peter Penashue resigned his Labrador seat Thursday after admitting to accepting $27,850 in 28 illegal donations and claiming it to be a mistake of one of his volunteers. Penashue is being investigated by Elections Canada and a report will be released shortly. Based on recent findings, this electoral scandal goes up the Tory hierarchy. Penashue intends to run again and a veteran Liberal is ready to take him on.

Penashue has repaid the $27,850 in illegal contributions which revised campaign spending reports released on Friday state break down to $18,710.54 from Provincial Airlines and more than $5,500 from a construction company, Pennecon.

In addition to the illegal corporate sponsors, Penashue's brother-in-law granted his campaign an interest-free loan, which is illegal in Canadian election law, of $25,000 when he was running the Innu Limited Development Partnership.

However, putting all this money aside, it turns out that but it turns out an additional $44,350 was transferred in several instalments from the Conservative Party to cover the other debts starting last November.

Penashue claims he is uncomfortable with what happened and that he did nothing wrong because he didn't know. Well, it is his campaign and he is going to be an MP so he should have the proper conscience to oversee his campaign and make sure that all actions his campaign team takes fall in accordance to Canadian Election Law. Not knowing, simply isn't an excuse.

"What I saw, I wasn't pleased. So I thought that the best and appropriate thing to do was to resign," he said.

"I'm not comfortable with those illegitimate contributions and ... I don't think Labradorians feel comfortable with it either so I think it's proper that I resign and have the people of Labrador decide as to who they would like to have them represented in Ottawa."

"I haven't done anything wrong because I didn't have any knowledge to it," he added.

Stephen Harper has six months to call a bi-election and Newfoundland and Labrador MHA Yvonne Jones plans to go for the Liberal nomination to run against Penashue.

This scandal comes as the Conservative Party faces scrutiny for other election-related irregularities, notably allegedly sending misleading robocalls to over 200 ridings including a handful that came very close to the wire.

Penashue should have been responsible during his campaign and followed the rules to the book. Not knowing and inexperienced volunteers are not valid reasons for mistakes that break Canadian election law. What do you think: Should Peter Penashue be given a second chance in Labrador? Join us and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

NDP: Don't worry Claude, we're coming for you too!

The NDP launched robocalls yesterday to attack their former MP Claude Patry for defecting to the Bloc Quebecois last week. Patry left the party because of their stance on the Clarity Act and Quebec nationalism.

Canada obtained a copy of the robocall where NDP deputy national director Chantal Vallerand narrated the following message to Patry's constituents.

"Last week, he mocked you and all voters in Jonquière-Alma in quitting the NDP to join another political party," Vallerand said in French.

"We believe Mr. Patry should have the courage of his convictions by stepping down and running in a byelection. Since Mr. Patry didn't ask your opinion before making his decision, we decided to do so."

The call then instructed listeners to press 1 to be redirected to a voicemail box where they can leave a message for Patry and provides a toll-free number for the NDP, as well as the address for the party's headquarters in Ottawa.
Bloc Quebecois leader Daniel Paillé called the NDP's action 'shameful.'

"Now that we're in the leadership of Tom Mulcair, who falls into the old habits of the Conservatives, and who says we're going to do robocalls, and who says we're going to apply partisan pressure, I think on the part of Mr. Mulcair, it's shameful," Paillé said.

Mulcair defended himself stating:

"I'm extremely okay with that approach by the party. I find that it's outrageous that someone who presented himself with one political party, without having the courage to consult the people in his riding, could quickly change parties," Mulcair said.

However, while the NDP has held this position for a while, the current electoral system acts to elect MPs based on the idea that the MP represents the riding and not a particular political party. It appears the NDP are playing politics with this matter.

Patry isn't the first defection to the NDP, last year, Lise St-Denis crossed the floor to the Liberals and the NDP responded by attacking her character and slandering her.

What do you think of the NDP's response to Patry's defection? Join us and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Second NDP MP Ditches the Orange Wave

NDP MP Claude Patry in the Quebec riding of Jonquière-Alma has defected to the Bloc Quebecois becoming the second of the Orange wave to leave the Official Opposition. Patry leaves citing his stance on Quebec sovereignty sparking backlash from the governing Conservatives on the NDP's commitments to Canada. Patry will join the other 4 remaining Bloc Quebecois MPs changing the seat count to 5 for the BQ and 101 for the NDP.

“I voted for Quebec sovereignty in the last two referendums. I hoped that Quebec should become a country and I still hope for that,” newly minted Bloc Quebecois MP Claude Patry said.

Patry said that his views parted with that of the NDP when they proposed a private member's bill stating that a referendum's wording must be approved by both federal and provincial governments. The NDP position, he said, “demonstrates unequivocally that the party favours Canada’s interest over those of the Quebec nation.”

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair defended his party's stances saying that Patry fought an election defending the Sherbrooke Declaration and should resign and fight as a BQ candidate in a by-election. 

The Conservatives, meanwhile, took the defection as another opportunity to question the NDP's stance on national unity. 

“I am somewhat concerned, but I can say it’s not a big surprise,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper said. “There is a certain ambiguity within the NDP caucus in Quebec as to Canadian unity. There are a lot of connections between the NDP Quebec caucus and Quebec Solidaire [a provincial separatist party], and I am not surprised to see this type of development.”

Patry follows Liberal MP Lise St-Denis who also was elected as part of the orange wave in her Quebec riding of St-Maurice-Champlain but left for the Liberals because she felt Liberal positions were more pragmatic and suited to her constituency than those of the NDP. Unlike with Patry, St-Denis was met with a major backlash from inside the NDP which acted to ruthlessly attack her publicly for her defection. 

Last year, the NDP called her defection a lack of respect to democracy, and party insiders didn't have anything good to say about her character either.

"They [said] Ms. St-Denis was a difficult, almost impossible person to work with," CTV’s political correspondent Bob Fife said, relating the NDP's standpoint that, "This is not a coup for the Liberal Party."

However, a year later and controversy over the fact that the NDP would allow Quebec to separate with a referendum with 50%+1 majority while requiring a two-thirds majority to amend their party's constitution has kept them fairly mum on the recent defection to the Bloc Quebecois. Either this or perhaps they have a preference for those who defect to the Bloc Quebecois over those who defect to the Liberals? Join us and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.