Canada’s New Democrats
Nouveau Parti démocratique du Canada
300–279 AVENUE LAURIER AVENUE WEST/OUEST
OTTAWA, ONTARIO K1P 5J9
PHONE // TÉLÉPHONE 
FAX // TÉLÉCOPIEUR 

Mr. Yves Côte, QC
Commissioner of Canada Elections
P.O. Box 8000, Station T
Ottawa, Ontario
K1G 3Z1
VIA FACSIMILE: 613-954-8584
October 16, 2015
M. Côte:
I write to seek an investigation by Commissioner of Canada Elections into
the possibility of a contravention of the Elections Act, by either or both of
the Liberal Party of Canada, and/or TransCanada Corporation.
It has been widely reported that the now-former Liberal Campaign CoChair, M. Daniel Gagnier, provided advice to TransCanada Corporation
concerning how it should approach the lobbying of a new Federal
Government after October 19th. He undertook this activity while he was
co-chair of the Liberal Party of Canada’s election campaign.
The Liberal Party initially defended these activities, saying it found nothing
wrong with them or M. Gagnier’s conduct. Within 24 hours, they had
changed their minds, and M. Gagnier was voluntarily resigning, in order not
to “be a distraction”, even while they blamed others for drawing this to the
public’s attention.
Late yesterday, however, it came to light in statements from both
TransCanada Corporation and the Liberal Party of Canada, that M. Gagnier
has been engaged as a consultant lobbyist on the company’s behalf since
at least the spring of 2015. The Liberal Party now confirms that they knew
of this activity, although apparently found no conflict or issue with it until
the media and the public came to know of it.
While all of these revelations are troubling, there are specific aspects
of this affair which directly concern your office and duties. The NDP is
of the opinion that an investigation is warranted into the possibility that
M. Gagnier, TransCanada Corporation and the Liberal Party of Canada
contravened the Elections Act.

TOLL-FREE // SANS FRAIS 

613.236.3613
613.230.9950
1 866.525.2555

ndp.ca // npd.ca

 It now seems clear that M. Gagnier, and TransCanada Corporation, have
potentially run afoul of section 363 of the act, which sets-out who is an
eligible contributor and what constitutes a legal contribution.
Prohibition — ineligible contributors
  363. (1) No person or entity other than an individual who is a Canadian
citizen or is a permanent resident as defined in subsection 2(1) of the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act shall make a contribution to
a registered party, a registered association, a nomination contestant, a
candidate or a leadership contestant.
If your office does not find his activities constituted a direct contribution,
Commissioner of Canada Elections needs to determine whether his socalled volunteer role with the Liberal Party, while simultaneously being paid
by TransCanada Corporation, constitutes an indirect contribution under
Section 370 of the act.
Prohibition — making indirect contributions
 370. (1) No individual shall make a contribution to a registered party,
a registered association, a nomination contestant, a candidate or a
leadership contestant that comes from money, property or the services
of any person or entity that was provided to that individual for that
purpose.
Election expenses
 376. (1) An election expense is any of the following:
  (a)  any cost incurred, or non-monetary contribution received, by
a registered party or a candidate, to the extent that the property
or service that the cost was incurred for or that was received as a
non-monetary contribution is used to directly promote or oppose a
registered party, its leader or a candidate during an election period; and
  (b) any acceptance by a registered party or a candidate of a provision
of goods or services that is permitted under subsection 364(2), to
the extent that the goods or services are used to directly promote or
oppose a registered party, its leader or a candidate during an election
period.
In recent weeks, M. Gagnier has been observed providing counsel to Mr.
Trudeau on the Liberal campaign plane, and on the Liberal campaign bus.
He was without question an active, ongoing participant in the conduct of
the campaign.
If, as they have confirmed publicly, the Liberal Party of Canada knew of M.
Gagnier’s activities as far back as this Spring, and continued to condone
them while he performed his role as co-chairman of the election campaign,
there are clear grounds to investigate under this section. If, as now also
seems clear, the party turned a blind eye to the matter, the following subsection raises even further grounds for investigation.

 Specifically, section 368 of the Elections Act, concerning prohibitions on
contributions, says:
Prohibition — circumventing limits
  368. (1) No person or entity shall
 
 

(a) circumvent, or attempt to circumvent, the prohibition under
subsection 363(1) or 367(6) or a limit set out in subsection 367(1) or (7)
or section 371; or
(b) act in collusion with another person or entity for that purpose.

Prohibition — concealing source of contribution

  (2) No person or entity shall
 
 

(a) conceal, or attempt to conceal, the identity of the source of a
contribution governed by this Act; or
(b) act in collusion with another person or entity for that purpose.

Prohibition — accepting excessive contributions

  (3) No person who is permitted to accept contributions under this
Act shall knowingly accept a contribution that exceeds a limit under
this Act.
Prohibited agreements
  (4) No person or entity shall enter into an agreement for the provision
for payment of goods or services, directly or indirectly, to a registered
party or a candidate that includes a term that any individual will make
a contribution, directly or indirectly, to a registered party, a registered
association, a nomination contestant, a candidate or a leadership
contestant.
I urge you to investigate this matter forthwith, given the urgency of the
choice facing Canadian electors.
Yours truly,

Anne McGrath
National Director
New Democratic Party of Canada