Sign the petition calling to tell Parliament they must bring federal political parties under real privacy oversight.
Sign the Petition
A lot of Canadians will know Fair Vote Canada from your strong work advocating for a more proportional and fair electoral system. Do you see a link between that work and this campaign?
Anita: These campaigns share common values: fairness, power to voters, and reforms to strengthen and protect democracy. It is also likely that our winner-take-all voting system is part of the reason privacy legislation that applies to political parties in Canada has remained out of reach so far.
The European Union has had strong privacy legislation, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), for over a decade, which also applies to political parties. They passed the legislation with almost unanimous consent in the European Parliament.
It’s notable that EU politicians were willing to implement stringent privacy guardrails that apply to their political parties, whereas Canadian politicians refuse to subject themselves to any rules. While part of the answer is that the EU has enshrined the right to privacy and the right to data protection in their constitution, another part of the answer may be found in the electoral system. The members of the European Parliament are elected by proportional representation. Most of the member countries use proportional representation in their country’s elections.
How does Canada compare in terms of electoral systems and privacy regulation?
Anita: Canada, US and Australia, countries which all have very poor or almost no privacy regulations for parties, all use winner-take-all voting systems (first-past-the-post or winner-take-all ranked ballot).
In these winner-take-all systems, Members of Parliament (MPs) are elected in single-member districts. Elections are often decided by a few thousand swing voters in a handful of swing ridings across the country. Getting a few votes in the right places can make the difference between a party getting all the power (a majority with 39% of the vote) or none. With a winner-take-all system, parties have powerful incentives to micro-target swing voters in swing ridings. Being able to collect and use data any way they want makes it easier for them to do that.
With proportional systems, by contrast, MPs are usually elected in multi-member ridings that elect several MPs, reflecting the diversity of local voters. The election outcome doesn’t hinge on being able to effectively microtargeting a few swing voters. With PR, a greater diversity of parties would also likely be represented in Parliament, including those more willing to push for positive changes to protect voter privacy.
How do you think lack of transparency in political party data practices affect trust in democracy?
Anita: Most voters in any OECD country, including Canada, don’t trust political parties. Many people assume that, faced with a choice between self-interest and the public interest, parties will choose themselves. Unfortunately the track record on any kind of reform that would seriously shift the balance of power from parties to voters - not just tinker at the edges - too often proves people right. The lack of guardrails for how parties can use our data is a case in point.
Future scandals related to political parties' misuse of voter data are inevitable, and when they happen, not only could they have serious consequences, including aiding foreign interference and potentially affecting election results, they undermine voter trust in democracy even further.
When voters do not trust their institutions or the traditional political players to work in the public’s best interest, this feeds far-right populism. Politicians whose badge of honour is their claim to be outside of the system, who make pledges to burn it all down or drain the swamp become more appealing to voters.
In countries with winner-take-all systems, any kind of “extremism” is more dangerous than in a proportional system, because an extremist faction can capture a big tent party and a party can win “majority” power with far less than half the vote. Once in power, populist parties may damage trust in democracy even more by further weakening checks and balances.
Political parties increasingly rely on voter databases, profiling, and digital campaigning. What rights do you think Canadians have over the personal information political parties collect about them?
Anita: It is common sense that there shouldn't be privacy rules that apply to almost every organization in Canada, and no rules for political parties.
Fair Vote Canada does not have a position on what rights should be included in privacy legislation that applies to parties. This is outside of our mandate and area of expertise. We appreciate the work of OpenMedia and other organizations and experts who have spent years studying and advocating this issue.
The partner organizations at VoterPrivacy.ca have identified core principles that have strong support from Canadians. First, independent oversight is critical. It is glaringly obvious that self-regulation is a disaster waiting to happen. Similar to how independent boundary commissions prevent politicians from drawing the lines to choose their own voters, independent oversight and enforcement of privacy rules builds trust and credibility. Second, with such strong incentives for parties to misuse data, it is worth considering making the penalties strong enough to actually deter them, rather than penalties that become the cost of doing business.
Polling shows strong support for political parties following basic privacy laws. Drawing from your experience, why do you think it hasn’t happened yet?
Anita: While we don’t know why past efforts have not been successful, based on our experience trying to reform a fossilized system, it seems likely that strong political self-interest, combined with the challenging nature of the issue, are probably the driving factors. Politicians who want to avoid principled and proactive leadership on an issue will claim that they need to hear more from the public about an issue first. They need to “hear it at the door”.
However, they also know that people are busy with their lives and that issues like the cost of groceries, housing, health care and immediate crises will always be top of mind.
Despite how critically important issues related to democracy are, and how widespread support is for rights and fairness, it’s challenging to mobilize the public to push the politicians hard on process issues. This gives the politicians a convenient excuse to delay or study the issue indefinitely while avoiding meaningful action.
The work of OpenMedia, BC-FIPA, the CCLA and others to continue building public support for change to push politicians for data protection is critical.
Parties who truly care about Canadians’ trust and resilience in our democratic institutions should be supporting reforms that would foster more of it - including ensuring privacy legislation applies to themselves.
Political parties collect our data. No accountability. No limits. Sign to fix this!
Sign the Petition
Learn more about Fair Vote Canada, the national campaign for democratic improvements which flow from their core values, recognizing proportional representation as the most fundamental and urgent change needed in Canadian politics: What is First-past-the-post?, What is Proportional Representation?, Volunteer with them, and Donate.