Two organizations from opposite ends of the political spectrum want Elections Canada to run future director elections for the Canadian Wheat Board.
Both the National Farmers Union and CARE say problems with the past two board elections make it clear that a change is needed.
“Everybody wants to see this as a fair and transparent process and Elections Canada could help us with that,” said NFU executive secretary Darrin Qualman.
But a spokesperson for Elections Canada said the agency is prohibited by the Canada Elections Act from getting involved in the wheat board vote.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
“Our mandate in the act is very clear,” said Francis Charette. “It is the organization of federal elections.”
He said if the government wants the agency to run the CWB vote, the act would have to be amended by Parliament.
An official with Agriculture Canada who asked not to be identified said the government did discuss the possibility of Elections Canada involvement “before, during and after” the 1998 CWB election.
The 1998 vote was marred by a series of problems with the voters list and the tabulation of results.
Qualman said he wasn’t discouraged by the fact that running the CWB vote is outside Election Canada’s existing legal mandate.
“I’m fairly certain that if it was the wish of federal cabinet to have them do it, they would,” he said.
The accounting firm Meyers Norris Penny acted as election co-ordinator in the recently completed 2000 wheat board election.
While the entire election process will be reviewed in depth by the board in the coming weeks, officials say there don’t seem to have been any serious problems.
“I think it was generally well run,” said Deborah Harri, the board’s assistant corporate secretary. “There are always areas you could improve on … (but) I wouldn’t say there are any significant flaws in the process.”
During the election campaign, CARE said problems with voter registration, particularly with respect to electoral districts, pointed out the need to put the election under the direction of an independent third party such as Elections Canada. (CARE, an acronym for choice, accountability, responsibility and efficiency, was set up to promote the election of candidates who supported a dual market.)
Following the election, the National Farmers Union said it also wanted the federal agency to run future elections. It says private accounting firms don’t have the power and authority necessary to investigate possible infractions of election regulations, particularly those covering spending by third parties.
The farmers union said some of the advertising and promotion carried out by unidentified third parties almost certainly exceeded the $10,000 spending limit, and has called on CWB minister Ralph Goodale to launch a formal investigation. But Qualman said a company like MNP can’t be expected to enforce the laws of Canada, adding it’s not in their financial interest to spend a lot of time and money investigating problems.
Harri said it is not the responsibility of the election co-ordinator to investigate possible violations of the elections rules.
In the case of spending limits, if the co-ordinator suspects any irregularities he is to report them to the board, which will then pass it on the minister.
“The co-ordinator’s job is to monitor and report, but not to police,” she said.
CWB chair Ken Ritter said he hasn’t heard of any problems serious enough to warrant turning the election over to Elections Canada.
“As of this point in time, I think everybody I’ve spoken to feels the election was fair and the process was fair,” he said.
Rick Strankman, who ran unsuccessfully against Ritter, said while the 1998 vote was rife with problems, he has no complaints about the 2000 election.
“I think MNP was running a top-notch show, second to none,” he said.
Peter Eckersley of MNP said the only real problem he had with the election was the turnout. Only 41.6 percent of eligible voters voted.
