There comes a point where we need to ask a basic question: What level of civility are we willing to let our politics sink to before we say “enough!”? There is no doubt that parties have every right to fight hard to win battles, but there are limits to how we wish to allow those fights to be carried out.
This is, of course, in reference to this week's admission that the Conservative Party was behind misleading calls being made to voters in the Montreal riding of Mount Royal. This heavily Jewish riding has been held by Irwin Cotler, the former Liberal Minister of Justice whose long history of defending human rights concerns and political prisoners is without reproach. He fought for Nelson Mandela, was involved in the Camp David Accords, and even today is involved in an effort to free a pro-democracy advocate imprisoned in Egypt.
But Mount Royal and the Jewish vote is high on the Conservative target list, much as they have targeted other ethnic groups across the country. The difference is, of course, that the Conservatives don't just campaign during elections anymore. It is a full-time job which is why they have gone to the extraordinary step of putting losing candidates on full-time contracts between elections to continue to campaign relentlessly. In Mount royal, Irwin Cotler's Conservative opponent in the last race, Saulie Zajdel, was retained as a “Regional Advisor” to Heritage Minister James Moore immediately after his defeat. This well-paid position, however, seems to be giving advice in the other direction as in a recent newspaper interview Zajdel described his new duties as speaking to various Montreal communities and informing them about government programs available to them. Paid partisan advertising for the party and for his next campaign financed out directly of taxpayer funds.
To consider how far the Conservatives will go to win this riding, let us remember that in 2009 the Conservatives used parliamentary funds to mail out leaflets to Mount royal residents accusing the Liberals of anti-Semitism, and challenging Mr. Cotler to raise the same complaint in Parliament. In effect, asking a Jewish Member of Parliament to accuse his own party of anti-Semitism.
Having failed in that effort, this time around they have a marketing company calling voters in that riding and asking them who they intend to vote for in the upcoming by-election in Mount Royal. The problem with this is that there is no by-election, but the implication is that Mr. Cotler has decided to abandon his constituents for other pursuits so soon after winning re-election.
The question, presented in such a way, is intended to produce a false sense of insecurity in the representation of a voter, and as such is rightly a breach of Parliamentary Privilege under the rules that govern our politicians. Indeed, as Cotler noted in his complain to the Speaker, this has already been a decided interpretation of the rules by Speaker Bosley when he stated:
“It should go without saying that a Member of Parliament needs to perform his functions effectively and that anything tending to cause confusion as to a Member's identity creates the possibility of an impediment to the fulfillment of that Member's functions.
Any action which impedes or tends to impede a Member in the discharge of his duties is a breach of privilege.”
But more to the point of whether this breaches the rules is the simple notion that it just isn't right to make a clearly false statement as a campaign strategy. The Conservatives are claiming that they used a falsehood in order to try and identify supporters, and that if they are required to be honest it will have “far-reaching ramifications on free speech”. Really? There is no other way to find your supporters except by lying to them? And we want to tell our politicians that it is OK for them to lie to us?
That is, I suppose, in keeping with the Conservative attempt last year to change the rules governing news to allow media stations to intentionally and knowingly disseminate a false story. Fortunately that did not survive in a minority circumstance last year.
We are already in a time of declining voter participation, in no small part due to a general distrust for the political process and for our politicians. This is evidenced by the latest survey of non-voters in which 28% of respondents stated that they were simply not interested in voting. If a democracy is to thrive it depends on an involved and knowledgeable electorate, but how can we achieve that under a system that promotes an open desire for false news and false electioneering?
The fact is that people just don't trust politicians, and the Conservative Party by their statements this week are reinforcing the notion that we shouldn't.
Where will this lead to and how low will it go? Will we have paid pollsters asking voters if they care about a made-up criminal record of a candidate? Completely falsified attributions in campaign literature? Planted news stories with supportive media groups?
How about this for a thought, that a party that cannot win an election on the merits of their platform instead of the depths of their bag of dirty tricks does not deserve their mandate as they have not earned it honestly. Further, that there is no place for using public money as a slush-fund to allow candidates to make a full time career out of campaigning.
If you are asking to be elevated to the top job in the country but choosing to do so by diving to the bottom of possible ethical practices then it can not be said that you are doing anything to elevate the way in which our country is governed. And that should be a concern to all Canadians.
Comments