Criminally irresponsible

I'm glad to see that plenty of bloggers share my concern about Bill C-31 in its discriminatory effect and/or its impact on voter privacy. But after some more thought, I may have severely underestimated the dangers the bill could pose.

Initially, my reaction to the bill was based on questions about how existing political parties would use voter information. And there's enough problem with the potential flurry of advertising targeted by age, or the risk of a (presumably) rogue party operative misusing the list, to justify fighting against the bill.

But then, with a guaranteed source of such important information available, it's highly unlikely that some other groups wouldn't see fit to try to get access to it as well. And it doesn't look like there's any room in the bill for Elections Canada to withhold the information as long as a formally registered party requests it:

45. (1) By November 15 in each year, the Chief Electoral Officer shall send to the member for each electoral district and, on request, to each registered party that endorsed a candidate in the electoral district in the last election, a copy in electronic form — taken from the Register of Electors — of the lists of electors for the electoral district.

Now, it seems fairly clear that the intent of the section isn't to extend access to the information for use other than political purposes. And the Canada Elections Act provides for penalties if information is misused, as well as a PR hit where a party is under investigation - which offers at least some reassurance that the major parties won't misuse information too flagrantly.

But consider the relative costs and benefits of setting up a pseudo-party, or taking over a small party's nomination, for the sake of getting access to birthdate information.

Would an identity theft ring be willing to front a candidate's nomination fee to get access to all voters' birthdates within an electoral district? Would a relatively well-organized group of professional home burglars consider it worth the investment to nominate a candidate in exchange for a complete list of a riding's residents who are are still in a detached home at a high age? And would those groups be the least bit dissuaded by the risk of a Canada Elections Act violation?

From my vantage point, the answers are almost certainly "yes", "yes" and "no". Which means that C-31 may go beyond mere disenfranchisement and targeted advertising, but also create a virtual certainty that political structures will be misused to the danger and detriment of a wide swath of Canadian citizens.

For those who wonder whether the definition of "registered party" might offer any protection against that scenario, the sad answer is: not for a second. The requirements for a party to be considered "registered" are minimal - which is great in encouraging electoral participation, but disastrous on the question of whether they'll be able to keep effective control over sensitive data contained in voters' lists. The current list of registered parties is 15 strong, making it virtually certain that anybody looking for a nomination will be able to sneak in under one of the minor-party banners...and it wouldn't be the least bit difficult to put together a new party even if every existing party is able to screen its candidates.

I'll allow for the possibility that this is a new concern which has managed to slip past the Cons, Libs and Bloc in their enthusiasm for more information about Canada's voters, rather than blaming them for having such a warped sense of priorities as to support the bill knowing what it could do. But one way or another, there should be no doubt that the costs of C-31's voter information provisions far outweigh any benefits. And there'll be plenty of blame to cast on any party who continues to vote for the bill once the dangers are known.