Voting ...can they do this?

[Topaz]

just read an article that says this Jewish man in Israel is raising money for former Canadians to fly to Canada and vote for Harper. He must not know that the Tories have change the "unfair Election Act" that if you have lived 5 years out of the country, you can't vote....Correct? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/israeli-canadian-crowdsourcing-to-fly-in-voters-201024419.html

[Guest]

How much money? I'll vote for Harper if he'll give me some...

[scribblet]

Harper didn't change the rules under that act, the 5 year rule was enacted in 1993.

[Ash74]

Don't let little things like dates or actual past government actions to fool you.

Everything is Harper's fault.

From climate change to people that drown kittens. It is all Harper's fault

[scribblet]

Don't let little things like dates or actual past government actions to fool you.

Everything is Harper's fault.

From climate change to people that drown kittens. It is all Harper's fault

Evidently

[BubberMiley]

How could anything be his fault if he doesn't even know what's going on in his own office?

[socialist]

How could anything be his fault if he doesn't even know what's going on in his own office?

I don't know what you think a PM does all day, but I am realistic enough to understand that a PM, any PM, will not occupy himself with solving the problem of a senator's greed. A PM, any PM, has much more important things to do and think about. That's why PM Harper instructed his CoS to make sure Duffy would pay back his greed.

[waldo]

Harper didn't change the rules under that act, the 5 year rule was enacted in 1993.

nice try! Previously, a Canadian living outside the country for more than 5 years could re-establish a voting right with a simple return visit to Canada. It was Harper Conservatives who had Elections Canada remove this capability. Recently a lower Ontario court ruled the 5 year stipulation as unconstitutional... that was over-ruled by an Ontario Court of Appeal based upon an appeal launched by the Harper Conservative government. It is expected this will proceed further to the Supreme Court of Canada...

[Shady]

How could anything be his fault if he doesn't even know what's going on in his own office?

Does Mulcair know what's going on in his office? He's got 70% of his party involved in improper spending of tax money.

[scribblet]

Does Mulcair know what's going on in his office? He's got 70% of his party involved in improper spending of tax money.

Chretien was exonerated over Adscam, did he know what was going on his office.

Ex pat turnout is very low anyway, it was upheld after being challenged but will be taken to the S.C. It was brought in, 1993 but wasn’t actually enforced until 2007.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/long-term-expats-don-t-have-right-to-vote-in-federal-elections-court-rules-1.3160110

Allowing Canadians who have lived abroad for more than five years to vote in federal elections would be unfair to those who live in Canada, Ontario's top court ruled Monday.

Snip;

Two Canadians living in the United States — Montreal-born Jamie Duong and Toronto-born Gillian Frank — launched the constitutional challenge, arguing the five-year rule was arbitrary and unreasonable. Both argued they had only left for educational and employment opportunities and still had strong attachments to Canada and a stake in its future.

[PIK]

Just because the MSM says he is a control freak and nothing gets by him, does not mean it is true.

[cybercoma]

Just because the MSM says he is a control freak and nothing gets by him, does not mean it is true.

How about when people who worked with him, like Tom Flanagan and Bruce Carson, say that?

[waldo]

Ex pat turnout is very low anyway, it was upheld after being challenged but will be taken to the S.C. It was brought in, 1993 but wasn’t actually enforced until 2007.

no - as I said: "Previously, a Canadian living outside the country for more than 5 years could re-establish a voting right with a simple return visit to Canada. It was Harper Conservatives who had Elections Canada remove this capability. Recently a lower Ontario court ruled the 5 year stipulation as unconstitutional... that was over-ruled by an Ontario Court of Appeal based upon an appeal launched by the Harper Conservative government. It is expected this will proceed further to the Supreme Court of Canada..."

it was always enforced since 1993... until Harper Conservatives had Elections Canada make that 2007 change, a simple return to Canada allowed an 'ex-pat' (living outside Canada for more than 5 years) to establish a voting right/capability. Somehow you fail to highlight it's the Harper Conservative government that launched a successful appeal against the lower court unconstitutional ruling... and yes, it is expected to reach the Supreme Court... where lawyers for the Harper Conservative government will endevour to argue the constitutionality of disallowing (these) Canadian citizens their right to vote.

[Argus]

nice try! Previously, a Canadian living outside the country for more than 5 years could re-establish a voting right with a simple return visit to Canada. It was Harper Conservatives who had Elections Canada remove this capability. Recently a lower Ontario court ruled the 5 year stipulation as unconstitutional... that was over-ruled by an Ontario Court of Appeal based upon an appeal launched by the Harper Conservative government. It is expected this will proceed further to the Supreme Court of Canada...

People who don't live in Canada and don't pay taxes in Canada have no business voting on how people in Canada should live and what taxes they should pay.

[waldo]

People who don't live in Canada and don't pay taxes in Canada have no business voting on how people in Canada should live and what taxes they should pay.

and in your view an arbitrary 5 year period dictates that... that you can do it for 5 years... but no more? Whether they choose to exercise it or not, that's 1 million persons with Canadian citizenship that you've just excluded from voting with your view - how UnfairElectionsAct of you! Under Section 3 of the Canadian Charter:

Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

[Bryan]

Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

They still have that right. All they have to do is re-establish residency so we know what riding they should vote in.

[Vancouver King]

I don't know what you think a PM does all day, but I am realistic enough to understand that a PM, any PM, will not occupy himself with solving the problem of a senator's greed. A PM, any PM, has much more important things to do and think about. That's why PM Harper instructed his CoS to make sure Duffy would pay back his greed.

..... and covering up the payback from Canadians to spare Tories public backlash. Harper appointed the senator at the center of this scandal, Harper appointed the PMO flaks at the centre of the cover-up scandal and Harper promoted one of the PMO miscreants to become his new Chief of Staff.

Harper will wear this scandal until Oct. 19th.

[waldo]

They still have that right. All they have to do is re-establish residency so we know what riding they should vote in.

I'll await the anticipated Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of that voting requirement (vis-a-vis that Charter right)... and whether it's been infringed upon.

[Argus]

and in your view an arbitrary 5 year period dictates that... that you can do it for 5 years... but no more? Whether they choose to exercise it or not, that's 1 million persons with Canadian citizenship that you've just excluded from voting with your view - how UnfairElectionsAct of you! Under Section 3 of the Canadian Charter:

Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

You have to be a resident of a riding to vote there. They're not residents if they're living in Taiwan or California. They can't vote. I'm fine with that, and apparently the courts are too.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Argus

[waldo]

You have to be a resident of a riding to vote there. They're not residents if they're living in Taiwan or California. They can't vote. I'm fine with that, and apparently the courts are too.

one court wasn't... we'll see what the ultimate court decides. I note you didn't bite at my mentioning the arbitrary nature of the 5 year period... you're fine with it... but not beyond 5 years, hey?

Edited August 17, 2015 by waldo

[scribblet]

You have to be a resident of a riding to vote there. They're not residents if they're living in Taiwan or California. They can't vote. I'm fine with that, and apparently the courts are too.

What is really interesting in all of this is that prior to 1993 expats with some exceptions e.g. military, could not vote at all. The legislation was enacted after length discussions and reports in order to expand voter's rights. There was a lot of discussion on the issue for years prior but long story = short, they settled on 5 years. There were no legislative changes in 2007 but Elections Canada decided to revisit the issue enforcing/applying the rules.

Pierre Kingsley disagreed with the 5 year rule but it didn't change, maybe it should but IMO if you don't own property or pay any taxes in Canada then why should they be able to vote. Having said that, I think the media is extremely remiss in not reporting on the whole issue so framing this is as all Harper's fault.

[Argus]

one court wasn't... we'll see what the ultimate court decides. I note you didn't bite at my mentioning the arbitrary nature of the 5 year period... you're fine with it... but not beyond 5 years, hey?

I think the rule tries to be a compromise, which is typically Canadian, between the right of a citizen to vote, and the legitimacy of that vote. Someone who has spent a year working outside Canada, which many do, is one thing, but someone who has moved away and been gone five or more years, well... It's a reasonable compromise.

[Bryan]

I think the rule tries to be a compromise, which is typically Canadian, between the right of a citizen to vote, and the legitimacy of that vote. Someone who has spent a year working outside Canada, which many do, is one thing, but someone who has moved away and been gone five or more years, well... It's a reasonable compromise.

Yes. Any time frame is going to be arbitrary. Five years is enough time to find out if whatever you were seeking outside of the country is going to work out for you or not.

[scribblet]

The interesting part about all of this is the way it’s been presented, take for instance this 2012 CBC article which says ‘A law stripping voting rights from more than a million expatriate Canadians who have lived abroad for more than five years should be struck down as unconstitutional” http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/expat-voters-launch-legal-challenge-of-5-year-rule-1.1277292 The comments and other articles attribute all of this to 'Harper stripping away voting rights' when in fact, he had nothing to do with it. It's getting attention now because of the legal challenge which the gov't responded to.

It’s a real misnomer because prior to 1993 ex pats couldn’t vote at all (with exceptions such as the military) the legislation was brought about twithin the discussion of charter rights and expanding expand voting rights to certain groups.. This was actually in response to a 1992 court decision where the judge recommended this area be looked at because of Charter Rights. They came up with the 1993 legislation and the 5 years as a compromise.

Pierre Kingsley disagrees with it, I'm inclined to think the S.C. will agree with him.

IMO One of the reasons given in the recent judgment makes sense.
Permitting all non-resident citizens to vote would allow them to participate in making laws that affect Canadian residents on a daily basis, but have little to no practical consequence for their own daily lives. This would erode the social contract and undermine the legitimacy of the laws. Etc

[waldo]

The comments and other articles attribute all of this to 'Harper stripping away voting rights' when in fact, he had nothing to do with it. It's getting attention now because of the legal challenge which the gov't responded to.

no - Harper Conservatives were instrumental in having Elections Canada remove the stipulation that allowed a 'simple return visit' to establish a voting right if out of the country for more than 5 years... and how cutesy your wording is about "responding to legal challenge"! Your dismissive" responding" implies the Harper Conservative government "has everything to do with... perpetuating... it"! ..... that Harper Conservatives accept the (yet to be determined by the SCOC) infringement to that Charter Section 3 provision ensuring all Canadian citizens the right to vote:

3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of the members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

.