Cleaning up nothing

Robert got to the story about the Cons' apparent mass violation of the Canada Elections Act before I could, but let's add a couple of elements to what's contained in the CP's coverage so far.

First, remember that the Cons' faulty analysis continued well into this spring, as the Cons apparently didn't know that their own Accountability Act would affect the Lib leadership convention:

A spokesperson for Conservative House Leader Rob Nicholson, who is shepherding the act through the Commons, dismissed the Liberals' fears of the bill's impact on their convention.

Genevieve Breton said delegate fees are meant to cover the actual costs of staging a convention. Thus, they are not considered a donation and are not subject to the donation limit.

"Basically, they were just wrong in what they thought," she said of the Liberals.

But Elections Canada, which implements and enforces political financing rules, backed up the Liberals' interpretation.

Rather than re-examining that conclusion for themselves even when there was substantial public debate about the effect of their policy, the Cons didn't bother questioning their wrongful assumption while the Accountability Act was still up for discussion in the House of Commons. Which could give the Senate a serious excuse not to go along with the bill, and certainly makes the Cons look like something less than a competent governing party.

Second, here's a quick look at the consequences of the Cons' ignorance under the Canada Elections Act. Among the provisions which it appears may have been violated are the following. First, for individuals whose delegate fee took them over the yearly contribution limit:

405. (1) No individual shall make contributions that exceed
(a) $5,000 in total in any calendar year to a particular registered party and its registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates;...

Second, for the Conservative Party and its agents:

405.2(3) No person who is permitted to accept contributions under this Act shall knowingly accept a contribution that exceeds a limit under this Act...

405.4 If a registered party, a registered association, a candidate, a leadership contestant or a nomination contestant receives a contribution made in contravention of subsection 405(1), 405.2(4) or 405.3(1), the chief agent of the registered party, the financial agent of the registered association, the official agent of the candidate or the financial agent of the leadership contestant or nomination contestant, as the case may be, shall, within 30 days of becoming aware of the contravention, return the contribution unused to the contributor, or, if that is not possible, pay the amount of it or, in the case of a non-monetary contribution, an amount of money equal to its commercial value, to the Chief Electoral Officer who shall forward that amount to the Receiver General...

427. No chief agent of a registered party shall provide the Chief Electoral Officer with a financial transactions return that
(a) the chief agent knows or ought reasonably to know contains a materially false or misleading statement

Emphasis added to show that a lack of knowledge isn't necessarily an excuse if the Cons have submitted inaccurate records without a reasonable explanation. And then the punchline, the applicable offence provisions:

497(1) Every person is guilty of an offence who...
(i.7) being a person authorized under this Act to accept contributions, contravenes section 405.4 (failure to return or pay amount of contribution);...

(3) Every person is guilty of an offence who...
(f.13) being an individual, wilfully contravenes subsection 405(1) (exceeding contribution limit);
(f.16) being a person entitled to accept contributions under this Act, contravenes subsection 405.2(3) (knowingly accepting excessive contribution);
(f.19) being a person authorized under this Act to accept contributions, wilfully contravenes section 405.4 (failure to return or pay amount of contribution);
(k) being a chief agent, contravenes paragraph 427( a) (providing financial transactions return containing false or misleading statement);...

500. (1) Every person who is guilty of an offence under any of (subsection)...497(1)...is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than three months, or to both.

(5) Every person who is guilty of an offence under (subsection)...497(3)...is liable
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine of not more than $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or to both; or
(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not more than $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years, or to both.

In other words, there are potentially serious violations at play for the Conservative Party, for its chief agent, and for many of those who attended its convention. And that's sticking to formal legal charges, rather than what should be plenty of public outrage at the possibility that money wrongly collected by the Cons may have helped to put them over the top in a close election.

In sum, while the key events may have happened before the Cons took office, this looks like the first major scandal of Harper's reign in government. And this could be a fatal blow to the majority hopes of a party which campaigned on cleaning up politics and listed its Accountability Act as the main accomplishment of its first session in Parliament.