A crucial ingredient is missing from the proposed new Canadian Wheat
Board election regulations, says the election co-ordinator.
There’s no way to enforce them.
“I think what we have right now is pretty much what we had last time
around – a lack of consequence in the event of somebody not following
the rules,” said Peter Eckersley of the accounting and consulting firm
Meyers Norris Penny.
The federal government has proposed several changes to the rules
Read Also
Petition launched over grazing lease controversy
Battle continues between the need for generation of tax revenue from irrigation and the preservation of native grasslands in southern Alberta rural municipality.
governing this fall’s election of CWB directors, designed mainly to put
tighter controls on campaign spending by third party groups.
Eckersley said the proposed changes are positive, but what’s lacking is
a system to make sure the new rules are adhered to.
The regulations still don’t provide the election co-ordinator or any
other individual or agency with the authority to investigate violations
of the rules, he said, nor do they set out any penalties for
non-compliance.
That could lead to problems.
“Somebody may decide they’ll just not adhere to the regulations
because they look at them and say ‘what happens if we don’t?’ Nothing,”
said Eckersley. “If there is a consequence, the knowledge that a
failure to adhere to the regulations could result in referral to some
enforcement agency; that lets people know we’re not fooling around.”
The last CWB election in 2000 was marked by concerns over the actions
of a group called CARE, which collected money from individual farmers
and one grain company and distributed it to candidates who opposed the
board’s monopoly.
CARE ignored requests by the election co-ordinator to register as a
third party, which would have made it subject to spending limits on
election advertising.
Eckersley said that issue could have been dealt with more effectively
if the regulations had set out a procedure for investigating whether
the rules were broken, and if so what penalties would be imposed.
The current regulations state that “the election co-ordinator shall
ensure that the conduct and management of the elections of directors is
conducted fairly, impartially and in accordance with the CWB Act and
the election regulations.”
Eckersley said the most effective method of enforcement would be for
the election co-ordinator to refer possible violations to the minister
responsible for the CWB, who would then get the RCMP to investigate.
At least one farm organization agrees the rules on spending limits must
be accompanied by better enforcement.
“Without explicit penalties or effective investigation and enforcement
measures, spending limits will fail to curb improper election
spending,” NFU president Stewart Wells said in a recent letter to
federal officials in charge of the election rules.
After receiving several recommendations from the CWB’s board of
directors last year, the government proposed three changes:
- The definition of a third party has been changed to include groups
and coalitions, not just individuals.
- All election advertising must display the name of the sponsoring
individual or group.
- Third party intervenors must file a report on their advertising
expenses with the election co-ordinator at the end of the election
period, specifying who contributed money to the third party.
Those proposals were published in The Canada Gazette Part 1 for a
15-day public comment period, ending Aug. 3. The government also sent
letters to 16 farm and grain industry groups asking for their views on
the proposed changes.
Bruce Hayes of Agriculture Canada’s grains and oilseeds division said
the department received six responses.
“Some groups wanted tighter regulations and other groups wanted looser
regulations,” he said. “It really was highly polarized and ran the
gamut.”
For example, the NFU said while the changes are useful, they will be
insufficient to deal with the “complex funding schemes employed by
candidates and organizations intent on weakening the CWB.”
It wants tighter rules to prevent grain companies and other corporate
interests from funneling money through third party groups to candidates
or other organizations. It also wants limits on all election-related
spending, not just advertising.
At the other end of the spectrum, the Western Canadian Wheat Growers
Association doesn’t think there should be any restrictions on third
party spending by farm groups.
Policy manager Paul Earl said it’s perfectly legitimate for farm
organizations to donate money to candidates whose views they support.
“That’s what this is supposed to be all about, to let farmers organize
and elect the directors they want to carry out their policies,” he
said. “Farmers aren’t third parties in this, they’re first parties.”
Earl said the association isn’t particularly concerned about spending
by industry groups like grain companies or railways. It’s more
concerned about the wheat board itself getting involved in the election.
Ironically, while they disagree on just about everything to do with
election rules, the NFU and the WCWGA both want the wheat board
elections to be run by Elections Canada, the agency that runs federal
elections.
Hayes said the government is analyzing comments and will announce its
decision soon. The election period is slated to get under way Sept. 3.
