Skip to content

Fair play, politics at odds

As the robocall scandal deepens, it’s difficult not to be at least a little cynical about the eventual outcome.
Our_View_March_2009
Array

As the robocall scandal deepens, it’s difficult not to be at least a little cynical about the eventual outcome.

Conservative politicians are fending off accusations that workers in dozens of closely-fought ridings made calls to supporters of opposing parties designed to confuse, frustrate or deflect during the May 2011 federal election.

It suggests organization, decision-making and purpose, not the random work of a few ill-handled party zealots.

So brace yourself for an outburst of political finger-pointing and name-calling, followed by sober admissions of a failure to police rogue campaigners, punctuated by a careful promise to root out and remove all wrong-doers. And don’t be surprised if a liberal mix of stonewalling is part of this dramedy.

Finally, there will likely be a scapegoat or two, and perhaps even charges.

But in the end, it’s fair to expect that another scandal will be washed away like so much chalk graffiti on a playground sidewalk.

And the Conservatives are likely to deflect any and all calls for an independent inquiry or investigation. The risk is just too high that the party at its core could be implicated if an official probe were to take place.

It would be wrong to call this a tempest. The allegations are serious and troubling.

Conservative operatives are alleged to have called NDP and Liberal supporters, masquerading as opposition party workers, and either harassed them or told them that their polling station location had been changed. Some of the calls were automated; some were live and the callers were, apparently, aggressive.

This harassment and misinformation was designed to shift the balance of votes to Conservative candidates, obviously.

Essentially we’re talking about fairness here, and fair play should be front and centre, even in politics.

But nothing should be more sacrosanct than the purity of the democratic process. To fiddle with that shows not just a lack of respect for our system, but also demonstrates a troubling disregard for every voter, particularly those who have been the targets of such manipulation.

What does it say of any operatives, and their parties, when they willingly subvert both the voters and the electoral process?

Of course, we’re also talking about outcome: the election resulted in 166 Conservative MPs forming a majority, after two minority Conservative governments.

Twelve fewer Conservative seats and Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s party would be scraping and bowing to pass every piece of legislation, again, in a minority government position.

Commentators and opposition MPs are suggesting this scandal is as troubling as the sponsorship scandal that tainted Jean Chretien’s Liberal government.

Because money doesn’t appear to have been one of the tools, and because the gain is less easily defined, it’s unlikely that the scandal will morph into such a devastating issue for the Conservatives. It will not stick to them the way the sponsorship scandal fixed itself to the Liberals.

But that doesn’t mean that voters shouldn’t be both appalled and indignant. And we should be demanding answers. It’s just unlikely that we’ll be handed those answers by Harper’s government, or that the Conservatives will initiate a process that will bring those answers in a full and edifying way.

John Stewart is the Advocate’s managing editor.