Roundup: On foreign money in federal elections

Posted on by

Yesterday I mentioned a certain moral panic disguised as “journalism” authored by former Calgary Herald opinion editor Licia Corbella when it came to accusations about foreign money trying to influence the 2015 election. Anyone reading the piece should have clued into the fact that it was a hit-job, from the sympathetic portrayal of Joan Crockatt, the lack of corroborating evidence, the one-sided sources, oh, and the fact that it repeated the canard that the Tides Foundation was some kind of influence clearing house without actually digging into those numbers beyond their top-lines. And too many outlets ran with the story as is on the first day, and really only started to question it yesterday. VICE did a pretty good takedown of the claims, and when some of the other outlets started asking questions about that “report” with the accusations, the excuses for why it couldn’t be produced were…dubious to say the least.

This notion that there is a problem with foreign money influencing elections via third parties is also dubious, and while the Commissioner of Elections said he wanted the legislation tightened during a Senate committee hearing, a former lawyer form Elections Canada disputes some of the Commissioner’s interpretation of the law.

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867440836228902917

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867441368242810892

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867441764394840067

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867442133984325632

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867442596561530880

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867443006596673543

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867443485380669447

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867443846271168512

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867444261721169921

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/867444497772367873

If more people had closely read Corbella’s piece in the first place, I think we could have avoided the pile on of hot takes that swiftly resulted on Monday. As a columnist, Corbella was a known fabulist, which is why this piece of “journalism” should have been treated with utter suspicion from the start.

Good reads:

  • Apparently our secret weapon at the NATO summit are comparisons of the ways other countries calculate their defence spending, which makes it look bigger.
  • Senators are planning to amend a bill to reduce sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act, which the government may not support.
  • Jody Wilson-Raybould’s father, a hereditary chief in BC, thinks the MMIW Inquiry commissioners need to be replaced. Not sure how that will speed things up…
  • The government is now accepting proposals for the planned “superclusters” for innovation, and hope to have them chosen by the end of the year.
  • Canada has withdrawn one of the surveillance planes flying in the Iraq mission, which partially signals that we have no plans in the region post-Mosul offensive.
  • The Shared Services Canada project to move all government offices to a single email system remains two years overdue. Nothing to see here…
  • The government, meanwhile, is pouring another $142 million into the Phoenix Pay System to try and fix it (which will still take years).
  • As we approach the government’s apology to LGBT Canadians, here is a look back at their attempt to create a machine to detect who was gay and who wasn’t.
  • In advance of the Conservative leadership vote, Andrew Scheer is talking party unity and slamming Bernier’s libertarianism as unelectable.
  • Kevin O’Leary isn’t expected to turn up at the convention either this weekend.
  • Here’s a good walkthrough of the highs and lows of the leadership contest.
  • Maclean’s Murad Hemmadi fact-checks Kellie Leitch’s “Canadian Values test.”
  • Scott Reid wonders if the Conservatives are about to elect their own Stéphane Dion.
  • Chantal Hébert doesn’t think too much of the nomination of Madeleine Meilleur for languages commissioner.

Odds and ends:

The Senate Wise Owls brochure is getting a rewrite to clear up a few of the complaints about it.

One thought on “Roundup: On foreign money in federal elections”

  1. Dale, you wrote that the Calgary Herald piece ” … repeated the canard that the Tides Foundation was some kind of influence clearing house…”

    I only found three statements about TIdes:

    1. “many of those third parties were funded by California-and New York-based Tides Foundation — which is known in Canada for holding numerous anti-Canadian oil campaigns.”
    2. “In 2015, Tides Foundation donated $1.5 million of U.S. money to Canadian third parties in the election year…”
    3. “Tides Foundation and Leadnow representatives did not return repeated phone calls and emails ”

    No ducks here.

Comments are closed.