Mary O'Neill: Under the UCP, that is wishful thinking. The $614 million MH Care (Corrupt Care) scandal didn't have a public inquiry. It was shot down by the UCP and Danielle Smith, the moment it was suggested. I agree that it is the way to go, but it will not happen with the UCP and Danielle Smith.
Bless you for your timeliness, clarity and urgency.
To my ears, you clearly state why the soothing blandishments of Ms. Smith should not be trusted and why the cries of support of those whom she favours should be overridden.
Nothing in my 87 years of life has threatened our capacity as Albertans to govern ourselves openly and fairly as much as the quiet backroom shenanigans of Ms. Smith. Not even WWII.
She is corrupting us from within our borders and within the deepest roots of our democracy.
If we do not stop her now, there may be no stopping her. If she wins, it is on us. She has not hidden her intentions or her actions.
Ruben Nelson: It's due to political ignorance, which thrives in Alberta. It's intergenerational, and permeates different places, including many churches. There are people who think that the UCP are better than the NDP, or the Liberals, and they don't see the immense damage they have done.
I agree with everything you say, Prof. Wesley. I would go further, and strongly recommed that not only is a public inquiry an absolute necessity in this instance, but the ideal person to Chair the inquiry, is a former Albertan, born in Pincher Creek, Law degree from the University of Alberta, 17 years as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., C.C., CStJ, FCIArb. Recognized world-wide during her tenure on the Supreme Court as one of the foremost jurists in the world.
I'd be curious as to an informed view on what laws may have broken here, apart from those under the Elections legislation e.g. improper use of the Electors List.
If, for example, Centurion paid for the list, as Parker has claimed, could they be charged with receiving stolen goods? Or aiding and abetting a felony ( the original theft)?
That’s a reasonable question. Police do have the authority to enforce provincial laws (and municipal bylaws), For example, RCMP highway patrols are enforcing the Highways Transportation Act or the Motor Vehicle Act. Apart from the Elections Act however, I’m hard-presed to find anything in the Criminal Code that might constitute a criminal act.
The original list was not stolen, Elections Alberta provided it to the Republican Party as they are required to do by the Elections Act. There is no indication in anything I’ve seen that the list was then stolen from the Republican Party and sold to the Centurian Project. Possession of stolen property (whether purchased or not) is a criminal offense, but as I said, there is no indication so far that it was stolen.
As an aside, theft, and possession of stolen property are what is known in Canada as hybrid offenses. They can be treated as serious (indictible) or less serious (summary). “Felonies” are a feature of U.S. law, not Canadian law.
You are correct that aiding and abetting a crime is a crime, as is conspiring to commit a crime (even if not committed), but it must be an offense under the Criminal Code for either to apply.
Based on a cursory review of the Criminal Code (there are hundreds of sections and subsections), the only remotely possible offense I can find that might be applicable is:
Identity documents
· 56.1(1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, procures to be made, possesses, transfers, sells or offers for sale an identity document that relates or purports to relate, in whole or in part, to another person.
· For greater certainty
(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) does not prohibit an act that is carried out
o (a) in good faith, in the ordinary course of the person’s business or employment or in the exercise of the duties of their office;
o (b) for genealogical purposes;
o (c) with the consent of the person to whom the identity document relates or of a person authorized to consent on behalf of the person to whom the document relates, or of the entity that issued the identity document; or
o (d) for a legitimate purpose related to the administration of justice.
· Definition of identity document
(3) For the purposes of this section, identity document means a Social Insurance Number card, a driver’s licence, a health insurance card, a birth certificate, a death certificate, a passport as defined in https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec57subsec5_smooth, a document that simplifies the process of entry into Canada, a certificate of citizenship, a document indicating immigration status in Canada, a certificate of Indian status or an employee identity card that bears the employee’s photograph and signature, or any similar document, issued or purported to be issued by a department or agency of the federal government or of a provincial or foreign government.
· Punishment
(4) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1)
o (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
o (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
The legal issue with respect to this section of the Code would be whether a voters list falls within the definition of an “identity document”.
Now, people could suffer all sorts of harms ranging from threats to violence and if those harms could be linked to them having been idenified because of the publication of the list, then there is certainly the possibility that aiding and abetting, or even criminal negligence, could be demonstrated. But the harm would first have to occur, and the link to the publication of the list would have to be proved beyond a resonable doubt.
Public inquires rarely yield much in Canada, but one should be called anyways. Could Centurion face civil claims from this?
A more fundamental question is what is the rationale for Elections Alberta sharing the list with political parties? This information is proprietary and shouldn't be shared at all.
This is an excellent article. This matter should be taken to the limits of the law. But the word of the law and the spirit of the law seem to be two different things under our UCP government. This is hyperbole, but I sometimes feel that this province should be put under trusteeship, and our elections supervised by United Nations observers!
This is absolutely sickening, very concerning, and very frightening. It is a further continuation of the erosion of our democracy in Alberta. Many players in the separation camp are obviously involved, and they were enabled by the UCP and Danielle Smith. With this, it even goes before Danielle Smith became premier.
The UCP were involved with the Kamikaze situation. As soon as Elections Alberta was investigating this very serious matter, the head of Elections Alberta, at that time, Lorne Gibson, and all of his staff were sacked by Jason Kenney, in a cowardly move, when he was out of Alberta, Canada, and in the United States, in Texas. At least $230,000 in fines were handed out to numerous UCP members, because they broke the law.The UCP disabled any judicial powers that Elections Alberta has. They have no power do do anything. David Parker owes Elections Alberta around $10,000 in fines as an individual, and his organization, (?) Take Back Alberta, owes Elections Alberta in excess of $100,000, for not following election guidelines. He refuses to pay them. Bill 54, ensues that Elections Alberta has no power to prosecute.
This information was already taken over a month ago. Elections Alberta was contacted then about it, and didn't do anything about it. That is shocking, and very concerning. Victims of domestic violence are put at risk, identity theft and fraud are also a likelihood.
The UCP fires or replaces gatekeepers in bodies that are supposed to be neutral, and replaces them with their hand picked appointees, who are UCP members. Even the R.C.M.P who was and is investigating nefarious activities by the UCP, such as the UCP's $614 million MH Care (Corrupt Care) scandal, are being replaced by a provincial police force. Besides this, the UCP created bills that allow the nefarious activities to continue. Danielle Smith was away in Europe, and had a ho-hum attitude about this, and said to wait for the R.C.M.P and Elections Alberta to deal with this. What a joke! Except the effects of this are way too serious to brush off.
The media isn't saying what they should be about this. That's another problem. Columnists, such as Rick Bell are busy bad-mouthing Naheed Nenshi and the NDP, with some pathetic poll results, while praising the UCP and Danielle Smith. Lorne Gunter is beaking off about Mark Carney. Many other columnists are silent.
There has to be seriously and lengthy jail time for all involved, and Elections Alberta needs to have its judicial powers restored. The entire UCP needs to be fired.
However, I think it unlikely a full blown public inquiry could be concluded by a six month minimum, as you suggest. The most comparable inquiry in importance I can think of, into Principle Group, took 14 months. The phoney baloney Inquiry into Anti- Albertan Energy Campaigns, ran between 2019-21, cost us $3.5 million, and produced exactly nothing. Not that that's likely in this case, but the point being that public inquiries are cumbersome, ponderous instruments. If the goal is to delay or cancel the separation referendum, I suppose it might work. Which is why the UPC will never allow it. And as odious as the separatists' goal is, denying or postponing their day at the polls would only strengthen their resolve.
One advantage of a public inquiry could be to find out about the other investigations Chief Electoral Officier McClure hinted in his Friday statement are being hamstrung by the UCP's restrictions ( "other matters").
The other course of action is a class action lawsuit against the UCP. They showed support for the separatists, and weakened the powers of the gatekeepers at Elections Alberta. Danielle Smith shows no real concern for this, because David Parker, and Jeff Rath, are connected to her and the UCP.
Totally agree. I do find it interesting that this came to light and action just as the deadline for the Separatist petition was so near. I understand the position that Elections Alberta were put in by the very Government that changes rules and laws to suit their agenda. A full judicial inquiry must ensue and penaties should be enforced regardless of who is found to be at fault.
I fail to understand how Bill 54 could have been passed when it so obviously restricted the legitimate powers of the EA and contravenes the interests of Alberta voters.
Because Dictator Dani has manipulated many laws and regulations to reduce the accountability of her and her minions, providing retroactive statutory immunity as well. Just think what she'd do if she could grant pardons (like she thought she could 🥴)? Her guiding light is the current POTUS.
Ksenia M: Take a look at other bills the UCP has created. It doesn't matter to the UCP, because they feel they are above the law. At least three bills allows the UCP to circumvent the law. They are Bill 8, Bill 14, and Bill 54. Two other bills allows any evidence to be destroyed (email correspondence, and the like). That's Bill 33 and Bill 34.
Smit has shown an incredible, consistent and repeated aversion to accountability. if there is any way to avoid accountability, or even skirt around it - there is no doubt she will take the route that most benefits her own goals.
As this threatens Canadians as well as Albertan’s it shouid not be left to the corrupt UCP to have the last word. This affects all Canadians, not just Albertan’s therefore the judiciary outside Alberta should as well have a seat at the “decision table”.
Penny the UCP are under investigation re CorruptCare so and now there needs to be a public inquiry re the law changes (Bill 54 and 14) that helped enable the fraudulent use of electoral list. UCP Justice Minister gave himself immunity prosecution. Onky person who would do thaf is someone knowing they have committed legal offences. No one in office shouid be given immunity from prosecution. How handy. That is why we kniw the UCP are corrupt and have been since day 1. They lied throughout their entire election campaign. Supporting an actual corrupt government will do nothing for your healthcare, pocket book, nor future. Smith will run off to her retirement in Panama after destroying Alberta’s economy, reputation on the world stage just like her pal Trump has done to the US.
Oh my …. facts are facts. Biased? Smart people see when they have been deceived and adjust their loyalty. That is what I did. There comes a point reality stares you in the face and only fools ignore what their own eyes see. The veil has been lifted. I do not support criminals robbing us of our tax dollars, healthcare, charter rights, citizenship, etc.
No one supports those things. Being “under investigation” is not the same as “has/have been found guilty of”. Allegations are not facts. It is not a matter of “smart people” or “loyalty”.
Penny, when the Justice Minister gives himself immunity from prosecution (Bill 14) that should set off alarm bells for everyone. The Justice Minister by doing so indicates he knows he is breaking laws. No one in Government or any job should have immunity from prosecution. Since you keep trying to make this political vs non-partisan, if they NDP or LIBERAL Justice Minister or any Minister in office gave themselves full immunity from prosecution, would you take the same view? You do realize that every Albertan’s personal data has been stolen. That includes you and your loved ones. Seniors are particularly vulnerable to scammers losing life savings, etc. This is not a game. This is very serious re bank fraud. Data breaches as someone impersonates you to gain access to your accounts. Anyone who works in IT knows how serious this is.
Penny Leifson: Rewriting the laws to enable corruption to go forward, unchecked is what the UCP has done. Firing the gatekeepers who are neutral and replacing them with UCP party faithful, points to the direction of guilt.
I agree totally. A public inquiry is the single and urgent best way to proceed for all the reasons you articulated here
Mary O'Neill: Under the UCP, that is wishful thinking. The $614 million MH Care (Corrupt Care) scandal didn't have a public inquiry. It was shot down by the UCP and Danielle Smith, the moment it was suggested. I agree that it is the way to go, but it will not happen with the UCP and Danielle Smith.
Jared,
Bless you for your timeliness, clarity and urgency.
To my ears, you clearly state why the soothing blandishments of Ms. Smith should not be trusted and why the cries of support of those whom she favours should be overridden.
Nothing in my 87 years of life has threatened our capacity as Albertans to govern ourselves openly and fairly as much as the quiet backroom shenanigans of Ms. Smith. Not even WWII.
She is corrupting us from within our borders and within the deepest roots of our democracy.
If we do not stop her now, there may be no stopping her. If she wins, it is on us. She has not hidden her intentions or her actions.
Ruben Nelson: It's due to political ignorance, which thrives in Alberta. It's intergenerational, and permeates different places, including many churches. There are people who think that the UCP are better than the NDP, or the Liberals, and they don't see the immense damage they have done.
Salutations for the use of "blandishments," sir!
I agree with everything you say, Prof. Wesley. I would go further, and strongly recommed that not only is a public inquiry an absolute necessity in this instance, but the ideal person to Chair the inquiry, is a former Albertan, born in Pincher Creek, Law degree from the University of Alberta, 17 years as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., C.C., CStJ, FCIArb. Recognized world-wide during her tenure on the Supreme Court as one of the foremost jurists in the world.
I'd be curious as to an informed view on what laws may have broken here, apart from those under the Elections legislation e.g. improper use of the Electors List.
If, for example, Centurion paid for the list, as Parker has claimed, could they be charged with receiving stolen goods? Or aiding and abetting a felony ( the original theft)?
That’s a reasonable question. Police do have the authority to enforce provincial laws (and municipal bylaws), For example, RCMP highway patrols are enforcing the Highways Transportation Act or the Motor Vehicle Act. Apart from the Elections Act however, I’m hard-presed to find anything in the Criminal Code that might constitute a criminal act.
The original list was not stolen, Elections Alberta provided it to the Republican Party as they are required to do by the Elections Act. There is no indication in anything I’ve seen that the list was then stolen from the Republican Party and sold to the Centurian Project. Possession of stolen property (whether purchased or not) is a criminal offense, but as I said, there is no indication so far that it was stolen.
As an aside, theft, and possession of stolen property are what is known in Canada as hybrid offenses. They can be treated as serious (indictible) or less serious (summary). “Felonies” are a feature of U.S. law, not Canadian law.
You are correct that aiding and abetting a crime is a crime, as is conspiring to commit a crime (even if not committed), but it must be an offense under the Criminal Code for either to apply.
Based on a cursory review of the Criminal Code (there are hundreds of sections and subsections), the only remotely possible offense I can find that might be applicable is:
Identity documents
· 56.1(1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, procures to be made, possesses, transfers, sells or offers for sale an identity document that relates or purports to relate, in whole or in part, to another person.
· For greater certainty
(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) does not prohibit an act that is carried out
o (a) in good faith, in the ordinary course of the person’s business or employment or in the exercise of the duties of their office;
o (b) for genealogical purposes;
o (c) with the consent of the person to whom the identity document relates or of a person authorized to consent on behalf of the person to whom the document relates, or of the entity that issued the identity document; or
o (d) for a legitimate purpose related to the administration of justice.
· Definition of identity document
(3) For the purposes of this section, identity document means a Social Insurance Number card, a driver’s licence, a health insurance card, a birth certificate, a death certificate, a passport as defined in https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec57subsec5_smooth, a document that simplifies the process of entry into Canada, a certificate of citizenship, a document indicating immigration status in Canada, a certificate of Indian status or an employee identity card that bears the employee’s photograph and signature, or any similar document, issued or purported to be issued by a department or agency of the federal government or of a provincial or foreign government.
· Punishment
(4) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1)
o (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
o (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
The legal issue with respect to this section of the Code would be whether a voters list falls within the definition of an “identity document”.
Now, people could suffer all sorts of harms ranging from threats to violence and if those harms could be linked to them having been idenified because of the publication of the list, then there is certainly the possibility that aiding and abetting, or even criminal negligence, could be demonstrated. But the harm would first have to occur, and the link to the publication of the list would have to be proved beyond a resonable doubt.
Thank you for that considered response!
How would the "rental" of a list, subsequently used for non-allowed purposes be treated?
I'm pretty sure a case for fraudulent use of stolen information could be made?
The Premier would reject her as a puppet of the bad people in Ottawa who she thinks are being mean.
No, thanks. She’s about as impartial as David Johnston, and Marie Hogue.
Public inquires rarely yield much in Canada, but one should be called anyways. Could Centurion face civil claims from this?
A more fundamental question is what is the rationale for Elections Alberta sharing the list with political parties? This information is proprietary and shouldn't be shared at all.
This is an excellent article. This matter should be taken to the limits of the law. But the word of the law and the spirit of the law seem to be two different things under our UCP government. This is hyperbole, but I sometimes feel that this province should be put under trusteeship, and our elections supervised by United Nations observers!
I believe this is the final straw. Public inquiry NOW.
Kim S: I'd like it too, but knowing the UCP, they don't want it.
This is absolutely sickening, very concerning, and very frightening. It is a further continuation of the erosion of our democracy in Alberta. Many players in the separation camp are obviously involved, and they were enabled by the UCP and Danielle Smith. With this, it even goes before Danielle Smith became premier.
The UCP were involved with the Kamikaze situation. As soon as Elections Alberta was investigating this very serious matter, the head of Elections Alberta, at that time, Lorne Gibson, and all of his staff were sacked by Jason Kenney, in a cowardly move, when he was out of Alberta, Canada, and in the United States, in Texas. At least $230,000 in fines were handed out to numerous UCP members, because they broke the law.The UCP disabled any judicial powers that Elections Alberta has. They have no power do do anything. David Parker owes Elections Alberta around $10,000 in fines as an individual, and his organization, (?) Take Back Alberta, owes Elections Alberta in excess of $100,000, for not following election guidelines. He refuses to pay them. Bill 54, ensues that Elections Alberta has no power to prosecute.
This information was already taken over a month ago. Elections Alberta was contacted then about it, and didn't do anything about it. That is shocking, and very concerning. Victims of domestic violence are put at risk, identity theft and fraud are also a likelihood.
The UCP fires or replaces gatekeepers in bodies that are supposed to be neutral, and replaces them with their hand picked appointees, who are UCP members. Even the R.C.M.P who was and is investigating nefarious activities by the UCP, such as the UCP's $614 million MH Care (Corrupt Care) scandal, are being replaced by a provincial police force. Besides this, the UCP created bills that allow the nefarious activities to continue. Danielle Smith was away in Europe, and had a ho-hum attitude about this, and said to wait for the R.C.M.P and Elections Alberta to deal with this. What a joke! Except the effects of this are way too serious to brush off.
The media isn't saying what they should be about this. That's another problem. Columnists, such as Rick Bell are busy bad-mouthing Naheed Nenshi and the NDP, with some pathetic poll results, while praising the UCP and Danielle Smith. Lorne Gunter is beaking off about Mark Carney. Many other columnists are silent.
There has to be seriously and lengthy jail time for all involved, and Elections Alberta needs to have its judicial powers restored. The entire UCP needs to be fired.
A very thorough argument.
However, I think it unlikely a full blown public inquiry could be concluded by a six month minimum, as you suggest. The most comparable inquiry in importance I can think of, into Principle Group, took 14 months. The phoney baloney Inquiry into Anti- Albertan Energy Campaigns, ran between 2019-21, cost us $3.5 million, and produced exactly nothing. Not that that's likely in this case, but the point being that public inquiries are cumbersome, ponderous instruments. If the goal is to delay or cancel the separation referendum, I suppose it might work. Which is why the UPC will never allow it. And as odious as the separatists' goal is, denying or postponing their day at the polls would only strengthen their resolve.
One advantage of a public inquiry could be to find out about the other investigations Chief Electoral Officier McClure hinted in his Friday statement are being hamstrung by the UCP's restrictions ( "other matters").
Very good points, unfortunately, there’s not a lot of tools to accountability in this.
That's what the RCMP are for.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. This is unbelievable.
Agree with you 💯 as how could anyone actually trust the result
The other course of action is a class action lawsuit against the UCP. They showed support for the separatists, and weakened the powers of the gatekeepers at Elections Alberta. Danielle Smith shows no real concern for this, because David Parker, and Jeff Rath, are connected to her and the UCP.
Totally agree. I do find it interesting that this came to light and action just as the deadline for the Separatist petition was so near. I understand the position that Elections Alberta were put in by the very Government that changes rules and laws to suit their agenda. A full judicial inquiry must ensue and penaties should be enforced regardless of who is found to be at fault.
I fail to understand how Bill 54 could have been passed when it so obviously restricted the legitimate powers of the EA and contravenes the interests of Alberta voters.
Because Dictator Dani has manipulated many laws and regulations to reduce the accountability of her and her minions, providing retroactive statutory immunity as well. Just think what she'd do if she could grant pardons (like she thought she could 🥴)? Her guiding light is the current POTUS.
Ksenia M: Take a look at other bills the UCP has created. It doesn't matter to the UCP, because they feel they are above the law. At least three bills allows the UCP to circumvent the law. They are Bill 8, Bill 14, and Bill 54. Two other bills allows any evidence to be destroyed (email correspondence, and the like). That's Bill 33 and Bill 34.
This is the best piece I have read on this whole fiasco. Full speed ahead with a public inquiry!
Smit has shown an incredible, consistent and repeated aversion to accountability. if there is any way to avoid accountability, or even skirt around it - there is no doubt she will take the route that most benefits her own goals.
Thank you for the excellent article. Agree with every single point made within.
There won't be a public inquiry if it's up to Danielle and the UCP. She's not about supporting democracy - she's trying to kill it!
As this threatens Canadians as well as Albertan’s it shouid not be left to the corrupt UCP to have the last word. This affects all Canadians, not just Albertan’s therefore the judiciary outside Alberta should as well have a seat at the “decision table”.
Penny the UCP are under investigation re CorruptCare so and now there needs to be a public inquiry re the law changes (Bill 54 and 14) that helped enable the fraudulent use of electoral list. UCP Justice Minister gave himself immunity prosecution. Onky person who would do thaf is someone knowing they have committed legal offences. No one in office shouid be given immunity from prosecution. How handy. That is why we kniw the UCP are corrupt and have been since day 1. They lied throughout their entire election campaign. Supporting an actual corrupt government will do nothing for your healthcare, pocket book, nor future. Smith will run off to her retirement in Panama after destroying Alberta’s economy, reputation on the world stage just like her pal Trump has done to the US.
Oh my! How very unbiased. 😉.
Oh my …. facts are facts. Biased? Smart people see when they have been deceived and adjust their loyalty. That is what I did. There comes a point reality stares you in the face and only fools ignore what their own eyes see. The veil has been lifted. I do not support criminals robbing us of our tax dollars, healthcare, charter rights, citizenship, etc.
No one supports those things. Being “under investigation” is not the same as “has/have been found guilty of”. Allegations are not facts. It is not a matter of “smart people” or “loyalty”.
Penny, when the Justice Minister gives himself immunity from prosecution (Bill 14) that should set off alarm bells for everyone. The Justice Minister by doing so indicates he knows he is breaking laws. No one in Government or any job should have immunity from prosecution. Since you keep trying to make this political vs non-partisan, if they NDP or LIBERAL Justice Minister or any Minister in office gave themselves full immunity from prosecution, would you take the same view? You do realize that every Albertan’s personal data has been stolen. That includes you and your loved ones. Seniors are particularly vulnerable to scammers losing life savings, etc. This is not a game. This is very serious re bank fraud. Data breaches as someone impersonates you to gain access to your accounts. Anyone who works in IT knows how serious this is.
Penny Leifson: Rewriting the laws to enable corruption to go forward, unchecked is what the UCP has done. Firing the gatekeepers who are neutral and replacing them with UCP party faithful, points to the direction of guilt.