Democracy Watch, a non-partisan group advocating for government accountability, has filed suit in federal court to have the September 7th dissolution of the Canadian Parliament declared illegal. In their suit, Democracy Watch contends that “in addition to contravening…the Canada Elections Act, the calling of the election infringes the right of all citizens of Canada to participate in fair elections pursuant to section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” (Section 3 of the Charter guarantees to all citizens the right to be involved in the election of their governments. It gives them the right to vote in federal, provincial or territorial elections, along with the right to run for public office themselves.)
Shortly after his election early in 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper introduced a bill to amend the Canada Elections Act which provided for fixed election dates every four years. Prior to that, election dates were chosen by the sitting Prime Minister with the proviso that a term not exceed five years, a system which many thought gave an unfair advantage to the incumbent. In Harper’s own words, “Fixed election dates stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar simply for partisan political advantage.”
Harper’s bill passed into law last year, and according to the new timetable it set, the next election was to be held on October 19, 2009. But in the light of current events, it becomes apparent that the Prime Minister had other plans from the start. A provision in the bill states that, “Nothing in the Act affects the power of the Governor General to dissolve Parliament whenever the Governor General sees fit.” Given the reluctance of any Governor General to interfere outright with the workings of Parliament, and the rarity of historical precedent for refusing a Prime Minister’s request to dissolve Parliament, that single clause allowed Harper to retain control. He knew he could still call on the Governor General, drop the writ, and have an election whenever it pleased him.
At the same time, Canadians were led to believe that the bill provided for ‘greater fairness, increased transparency and predictability, improved policy planning, increased voter turnout, and assistance in attracting the best qualified Canadians to public life’ as stated in the preamble and often repeated by its proponents. We were deceived.
What the bill did, and was designed to do, was allow Harper and his party to plan and begin campaigning for an election secretly set a year in advance of the prescribed date, while the opposition and the citizenry carried on with the work at hand. This is a true affront to democracy.
Using the excuse that Parliament was, in Harper’s own words, “dysfunctional” and “in chaos”, the Prime Minister claimed that he could not carry on in his role since the opposition parties were deliberately obstructing the work or government. Yet it was Harper who refused any kind of arrangement, understanding, or accord with any of the opposition parties, an odd stance given that such a partnership would have greatly facilitated the work of the House of Commons. And it was Harper who issued his sitting party members a two hundred page handbook on how to disrupt committee meetings. In spite of his and his party members’ lack of cooperation, during his two years and seven months in office 125 government bills were introduced and 65 passed into law.
Since Harper’s stated reasons for forcing an early election are so transparently false, we must ask what advantage he found in doing so.
Dissolving Parliament early meant that a number of embarrassing investigations and troublesome probes were dropped, along with contempt charges levelled against party officials for instructing their members not to appear at Parliamentary hearings or comply with subpoenas,(and against the members themselves for obeying those instructions). It also put on hold questions about Harper’s continued support of ministers and party members whose behaviour has been variously scandalous, harmful to Canadian security, and illegal.
But a bigger advantage to Harper was that it allowed him to bypass Canada’s Elections Act, the very Act he amended to “stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar simply for partisan political advantage.”
Canada’s election laws allow for only a 37 day campaign and tightly restrict election spending. Knowing in advance of the pending early election call, Harper and his party had months to prepare for and finance their campaign, and to do so without any legal restraint. They took full advantage that fact, holding fund-raising events and saturating the media with election-style advertising that lauded their leader and demeaned the opposition. In effect, Harper and his Conservative party have been campaigning across the country for most of the past year.
In the months leading up to Harper’s announcement of a premature election, he:
1. Announced hundreds of millions of dollars in future spending.
2. Spent millions of dollars in pre-election advertising, primarily
on attack ads against the opposition leader.
3. Took advantage of the ‘10%’ program under which members of Parliament are, at
public expense, allowed to send ‘information literature’ to up to 10% of the
constituents in other ridings. This is, to say the least, a questionable use of public
funds.
4. Called three by-elections, and then later a fourth by-election.
Interestingly, three of these were to take place the day
after the dissolution of Parliament by Mr. Harper. By this method he
extended those campaigns by an additional 37 days again at great
taxpayer expense.
The opposition parties, always with less financial backing and therefore forced to be more judicious in their spending, thought they had another year to prepare and were caught off-guard by the early election call. They have had to scramble to catch up.
With his head start, Harper was answerable to no one in his propaganda crusade for months, and has been able to set the agenda for the official campaign, putting opposition parties on the defensive from the word go. He saw in this scenario a chance to slide a majority government into place with ease, giving him free rein over federal funds and legislation for the next four years.
Democracy Watch filed a motion to have to have its application considered before the Oct. 14th election day. It was heard last Friday in Federal Court. At this writing, no decision has been released.
As has happened consistently under the Harper regime when government actions are questioned, the media silence surrounding the Democracy Watch action is resounding. Missing also is any meaningful media analysis of Harper’s early election call. It seems the media are either frightened, or are colluding with the erosion of democracy and human rights in Canada.
Since there is no precedent in Canadian history, it’s difficult to say what will happen if Democracy Watch wins its suit and Harper’s pre-emptive election call is found to be illegal. It is possible that the current election will be called off and Harper will have to serve out his term. It is also possible that there will be fines attached to his and his party’s illegal activities, perhaps even criminal charges under the very Elections Act he amended.
Whatever the outcome of the suit, there remains the fact that in order to enact his own agenda, Harper has deliberately and calculatedly deceived the very people he swore to serve. Canadians must know this, understand it, and prevent him from strengthening his hold on Parliament.
by Eve London, Canada