Kitchener-Waterloo NDP

It was a very Goodyear
Kady O'Malley | January 13, 2008 | 23:18:13 | Permalink :
http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dip&tt=&pid=99579&tid=99...
kady.omalley@macleans.rogers.com

UPDATE: Global National ran a story on the controversy on tonight's broadcast, but seemed to suggest that its reporters uncovered the story independently by going through Elections Canada filings "line by line" over the weekend. What a coincidence that they did so just two days after the notice of compliance appeared in the Canada Gazette, and the day after I wrote about it here. (Thanks to the Dan Report for sending the link!)

---
I fully intended to spend my Sunday night recovering from the nonstop rollercoaster of political intrigue that was last Friday's First Ministers' Conference. But thanks to the ongoing writers' strike, which is depriving me of pretty much all my guilty pleasure appointment television, I found myself reading back issues of the Canada Gazette.

(Before we get to the good stuff, let's pause for a moment to marvel at the magnitude of my political geekery. All done? Okay, moving on.)

Nestled amongst the boilerplate charter revocations and obscure regulatory amendment proposals, I stumbled upon this tale of campaign financing shenanigans that played out, apparently, during the last federal election, in the riding of Cambridge:

On November 6, 2007, the Commissioner of Canada Elections entered into a compliance agreement with Reginald Petersen (hereinafter referred to as the Contracting Party), of the city of Cambridge, province of Ontario, pursuant to section 517 of the Canada Elections Act.

The Contracting Party has acknowledged acts that constitute an offence under subsection 405.2(4) of the Canada Elections Act, that he negotiated and signed the lease for the candidate's campaign office, which included in its "Schedule A" to the lease, at his direction and pursuant to discussions with the agent of the landlord, directly below a column showing the addition and total monthly payment of $3,875.76, a sentence that read: "The amount of $3,875.76 shall be payable in full and a political contribution equal to half the above amount shall be made back to the tenant or as directed", an act that is prohibited by subsection 405.2(4) of the Act.

Prior to the conclusion of the agreement, the Commissioner of Canada Elections took into consideration that the Contracting Party acknowledged that this act was an error in judgement.

December 12, 2007

WILLIAM H. CORBETT
Commissioner of Canada Elections

From the Canada Elections Act:

405.2(4) No person or entity shall enter into an agreement for the provision for payment of goods or services to a registered party or a candidate that includes a term that any individual will make a contribution, directly or indirectly, to a registered party, a registered association, a candidate, a leadership contestant or a nomination contestant.

Now, it's worth noting that this is hardly the political scandal of the century -- or even the most damning example of questionable electoral ethics to emerge from the last election campaign. But what makes it interesting - in an ironic sort of way - is the fact that the candidate in question is none other than Gary Goodyear, the two-term Conservative MP who currently chairs the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. His website describes the committee as "one of Parliament's most integral committees," and notes that it "oversees all operations for the House of Commons including Security ... Electoral Reform, Code of Ethics, and Privacy" (emphasis added).

It was Goodyear, acting in his capacity as chair, who, last fall, attempted to thwart an effort by opposition members to have the committee look into allegations that the Conservative Party had made a "systematic attempt to defraud Elections Canada, as well as the Canadian taxpayer, in relation to the 2006 federal election." On two separate occasions, he ruled the motion out of order, but each time, his ruling was overturned by the combined votes of the opposition. As far as I know, no final decision has been made on whether or not the committee will go ahead with its investigation; every time the issue arose during the last session, the Conservative members were able to run down the clock with points of order and proposed amendments. The original motion remains in limbo, but will likely resurface when the House resumes sitting later this month.

Although there's nothing in the compliance notion that indicates Goodyear was aware that his campaign was playing fast and loose with the rules, this "error in judgement" by one of his supporters could still put the chair in a distinctly awkward position when the committee gets back to work later this month.

Oh, and for anyone who was wondering: Reg Petersen, the 'Contracting Party' who apparently cooked up the plan to have the landlord donate half the rent paid for the office back to Goodyear's campaign "or as directed," ran unsuccessfully in Cambridge for both the Reform and Canadian Alliance parties. He's the founder and chair of the Bridgeway Foundation, which he and his wife created to "[support] charitable projects that reflected their priorities as visionary entrepreneurs, yet which were rooted in the compassion the rises from the Christian faith."

To contact Max by e-mail: maxlombardi@ndp.ca
by telephone/fax or voice mail: 519-620-2888
LEARN MORE: http://www.ndp.ca