Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre MP Tom Lukiwski said someone in the Conservative Party “screwed up” by not identifying the party as the sponsor of the push-poll call that went out to many Saskatchewan residents two weeks ago voicing the party’s opposition to the province’s new riding boundaries.
That being said, he still objects to the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Saskatchewan’s final report tabled in the House of Commons Jan. 28 that redraws the province’s federal electoral map.
“I think you have to let them know who the sponsor of the calls are and that was not done,” said Lukiwski. “The party said there was a miscommunication there. I certainly take them at their word for that. They said they would be more diligent in the future and quite frankly had they identified the Conservative Party as being the sponsor of the call none of this, really controversy if you want to call it that, would have occurred.”
A push-poll call is a telemarketing call designed to rally opposition to a particular issue, but does so in a way that makes it seem it is a public-opinion survey. The push-poll call in this instance first gave the Conservative Party argument against creating urban-only ridings in Saskatchewan before asking recipients of the call to press a button if they are for or against these boundary changes.
Lukiwski said push-polls are not undemocratic as “all parties do them,” but whether they are effective or not could be debated. He said the call, which also went out to some of his constituents, is not the issue; it is the fact the Conservative Party did not identify themselves as the sponsor of it.
“Certainly a mistake was made,” he said. “That is the bottom line.”
Ralph Goodale, Liberal MP for Wascana, said he has filed a complaint with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) alleging the Conservative Party’s failure to identify themselves as the sponsor of the call broke telemarketing rules. He said the automated call said it came from Chase Research, but this company was obviously working on behalf of someone else and that someone else was not identified.
“It was essentially an anonymous call made for a political purpose and that purpose was not identified in the course of the call and that would appear to violate potentially a number of CRTC rules and regulations,” said Goodale. “It’s an issue here of transparency and honesty in making the call.
“Is it adequate to say Chase Research or should they say ‘hi, I’m employed by Chase Research, but I’m calling on behalf of the Conservative Party.’ That really is the nature of the issue here.”
To read more please see the Feb. 18 print edition of The Davidson Leader.