Conservatives frame electoral reform bill as elites versus ordinary Joes

By Jennifer Ditchburn, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA – What’s a government to do when a litany of parliamentary watchdogs, academics, aboriginal leaders, editorialists and opposition politicians say your legislation stinks?

If you’re Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, you seize the opportunity to make the debate over the Fair Elections Act into a political wedge issue — average Canadians versus the Ottawa elites.

Pierre Poilievre, the minister of state for democratic reform, spelled this out Thursday in a luncheon speech in Ottawa, borrowing a favourite phrase from former Ontario Conservative premier Mike Harris — “common sense” — to draw a line between ordinary folks and the out-of-touch political class.

“Away from the noise around political Ottawa, everyone understands that this is common sense,” Poilievre said.

“We’re just finishing two weeks away from Parliament. Out in our communities, it has been refreshing to be reminded of the massive gulf between those in the political bubble and everyday Canadians on the ground.”

For Poilievre, part of developing that us-versus-them frame on the debate has been to suggest there is only one real point of contention: the government’s plan to eliminate vouching.

The Fair Elections Act would do away with the practice, which allows a person who lacks proper ID to cast a ballot if someone else who can show ID is on hand to personally vouch for their identity.

Many experts — including former and current chief electoral officers — have decried the move, pointing to groups like homeless people and First Nations members who might not have ID, particularly proof of residence.

But that has not been the only criticism of the bill.

There have also been complaints about the limitations placed on the chief electoral officer’s ability to communicate publicly. A major loophole would allow parties to solicit previous donors as much as they want during a campaign without declaring it an election expense. And the bill has not given the commissioner of Canada elections any additional powers to compel witnesses or evidence.

By Poilievre’s own admission, the polls appear to be the reason the government is digging in its heels. Without a widespread public backlash to the bill, there is little motivation to change it.

The Tories have used political marketing strategies to highlight which segments of the population are most likely to vote for them. Those who are upset about the Fair Elections Act debate don’t appear, for now, to fall into those segments.

“The opposition believes that we should allow people to vote without showing even a shred of identification,” Poilievre said. “Canadians disagree. In fact, public opinion data shows that they overwhelmingly disagree.”

Craig Scott, the NDP’s democratic reform critic, admitted getting Canadians to understand their problems with the legislation is a difficult nut to crack.

The party has been targeting individual Conservative MPs at the riding level to convince them to support amendments. There are also petitions underway, and a nationwide day of protest planned for Saturday.

“They’re relying on the worst kind of majoritarianism and people’s gut instincts, and creating this notion of the ordinary Canadian, but the ordinary Canadian also has values, and the moment you explain to them it’s about the right to vote…you have a very different reaction,” Scott said.

The government employed a similar strategy when it imposed changes to the long-form census in 2010 by replacing the mandatory questionnaire with a voluntary survey.

In that case, a very long list of public policy planners, municipalities, religious and language groups, First Nations leaders and others lined up to oppose the move.

But the Conservatives framed the change as one of protecting ordinary Canadians against the prying eyes of the state. The concerns of even the chief statistician were dismissed.

“In my conversations I’ve had with constituents, they’re very surprised… when they hear that there’s a threat of jail time or fines for not answering questions on how many bedrooms you have in your house, or how many hours you spend doing yardwork or housework,” Edmonton MP Mike Lake told a parliamentary committee in 2010.

Before the census change was announced, there appeared to be no significant opposition to the mandatory long form, just as there has been no evidence of fraud connecting with vouching during elections.

But the census issue did not appear to cost the Conservatives at the ballot box. Nor did then-Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff’s early campaign focus on the Conservatives lacking respect for Parliament.

The Tories went from minority status to a majority government in 2011.

Scott argues that the difference now is that the government has lost the trust of Canadians, particularly over the last two years.

“At one level, it doesn’t take Canadians much once you give them a moment for that little extra explanation about why…(this bill) is a problem,” said Scott.

“One of the reasons it doesn’t take too much when you get that chance is they don’t trust this government. That’s an advantage we have.”

Top Stories

Top Stories

Most Watched Today