CHP Press Release: Sitting MPs Cling to Status Quo

October 20, 2007

The second-largest of 12 federal political parties that have yet to elect an MP has accused the four parties already in Parliament of manipulating the Elections Act rules to keep newcomers out.

Ron Gray, leader of the Christian Heritage Party, told Broadcast Arbitrator Peter S. Grant that allocating broadcast time according to past election results violates principles in a Supreme Court decision.

That decision, in a successful suit by the Communist Party of Canada against the 50-candidate rule in the Elections Act four years ago, rested on an interpretation of Section 3 of the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, which protects political rights of citizens.

Two statements in the ruling, written by Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, emphasize voters’ rights to be reasonably informed, and candidates’ rights to a reasonable opportunity to present their platforms.

"It has become apparent," Gray said, "that the parties now in Parliament intend to continue to abuse the law-making authority given to them by the people of Canada, in order to retain power and privilege for
themselves."

The CHP and five other smaller parties noted that changes to election financing rules have made it much more difficult for parties outside Parliament to raise funds—and at the same time give the four parties now
in Parliament $30 million a year of taxpayers’ money to fund their re-election campaigns.

Recently an Ontario court rejected the 2% and 5% threshold rules for access to public funding injected into the Elections Act by the former Liberal government’s Bill C-24; but the Conservative government has
appealed that decision. Gray said that appeal reveals "a continuation of the ‘fortress mentality’ of the four parties already in the House."

The CHP has, for a decade, proposed an alternative mode of public funding that would place the disposition of public funds in the hands of the electorate. This plan was presented to Parliament by the former
Chief Elections Officer, but was rejected by the Standing Committee on Elections and Procedures.

"Similar distortions of fairness have also plagued access to broadcast advertising," said Gray. "However, the Elections Act gives a degree of flexibility to the Broadcast Arbitrator, and that flexibility has, in
the recent past, been exercised with a view to leveling, to the limited extent the Act allows, the playing field.

"But much more is required."

The CHP, supported by all but one of the other extra-parliamentary parties at the meeting, asked the Broadcast Arbitrator "to appeal past partisan interests to the better natures of Canada’s MPs, asking them to
place the public good above partisan advantage."

The broadcast provisions of the Elections Act and its election financing provisions must be amended, they said, giving priority to the voters’ right to information priority, rather than advantage for the parties in
the House.

"The primary objective of all the regulations that bear upon financing and media access must be this," Gray said:"Voters have an absolute right to have full access to adequate information about all the electoral options available to them."