Freedom Flyer 22

the official newsletter of the
Freedom Party of Ontario

December 1992

Election Reform...

ALTERNATIVE PARTIES
CHALLENGE ELECTIONS COMMISSION

TORONTO (May 27, 1992) - In a rare display of solidarity on a number of issues which all relate to how Ontario political parties are regulated in Ontario, representatives of Ontario's alternative parties met with their regulatory agency, the Commission on Election Finances, to voice concerns that the commission, being made up of members from the major three parties, has been less than objective, fair, or consistent in its regulation of the smaller parties.

Present at the first meeting of its kind were representatives from the following officially-registered Ontario political parties: the Green Party of Ontario, the Ontario Confederation of Regions Party (COR), the Family Coalition Party of Ontario, the Communist Party of Canada (Ontario), the Ontario Libertarian Party, and the Freedom Party of Ontario. Issues discussed included representation on the commission, contribution sources, party funding, third-party advertising, all-candidates meetings, leadership debates, and a number of administrative issues.

KEY ISSUES

Among the alternative parties, some of the following agreements were reached:

Since corporations and unions have no vote, only individuals - citizens and landed immigrants - should be permitted to contribute to political parties;
While the Libertarian Party and Freedom Party objected to political party subsidies, it was agreed by all that while such subsidies continue to exist, then they must be fairly applied to all;
Third-party advertising is not harmful, but is rather part of the public information system;
All-candidates meetings must include all candidates when public (i.e., government-owned) facilities are used. Private meetings should not be restricted in any way.

One of the key issues raised by Greg Vezina of the Green Party related to the CRTC guidelines on "equitable" availability of media time on leadership debates. Vezina contended that these guidelines were violated during the last provincial election, and that the Elections Commission failed to investigate the violations. Vezina made it clear that a court challenge would be launched if the commission failed to react.

POSITIVE DECISION, NEGATIVE REACTION

After receiving requests from each of the alternative parties to make a ruling on the 1990 violation of the CRTC election guide. lines, the CRTC found, on October 27, 1992, that "Because there was a (leadership) debate and the leaders of registered parties not in the debate were not provided with some type of accommodating time, the Commission finds that there has been a breach of its guidelines." The CRTC went on to say that "if this type of broadcast takes place, all parties and candidates should be accommodated, even if doing so requires that more than one program be broadcast."

Unfortunately, despite the CRTC ruling, the Ontario Elections Commission has failed to act to correct the situation, which would effectively continue to leave the alternate parties out of the critical election debates that could very well make or break their election efforts.

COURT CHALLENGE LAUNCHED

As a result of its refusal to rectify the situation, a court challenge was launched on November 16, 1992 to try to force the Elections Commission to carry out its responsibility to initiate a prosecution against the broadcasting networks and others, based on the 1990 election violations.

A win on this issue would mean that, perhaps as soon as the next provincial election, smaller parties like Freedom Party will find their leaders given "equal" time during elections to compete for voter support. With support for the major Ontario political parties steadily declining, and alternate parties showing a significant increase in support, voters are entitled to know just what their full range of choices at the polls are.

We'll keep you informed as developments take place.