The censorship consortium

Why is the Green Party systematically excluded from leader debates, and why are all media and parties silent about this obvious travesty?

by Dan Crawford

The election-time debate continues over the existence of the Broadcasters' Consortium and their decision-making process for inclusion or exclusion of political parties in Canada's nationally televised leaders debates.

A problem that persists in Canada is the control and influence that non-voting entities extend over our country's democratic system. The Green Party leader Jim Harris was excluded from this election’s debates, but this in not a debate solely about the Green Party, it's about how a group of individuals can arbitrarily decide what the majority of Canadian voters will be exposed to, instead of allowing the citizens of Canada to decide for themselves. This is an issue about the Charter of Canadian Rights and Freedoms. About whether or not democracy can be compromised and freedom of expression controlled. The voices that claim to protect democracy and authoritarian control have been alarmingly silent on this issue.

Only one of Canada's Freedom of Expression groups have issued any public statements on their stance regarding the Broadcasters' Consortium. It comes from Democracy Watch, which said, “Any party that runs candidates in most ridings should be included in the election debates, as should any party that receives enough votes in a previous election to receive public financing. The media consortium and the other federal political parties should be ashamed of themselves for so arbitrarily and undemocratically shutting out the Green Party from the debates."

Interestingly enough, Trina McQueen, a moderator for the English debate, is also a sustaining patron of PEN Canada, a group that is committed to defending freedom of opinion and the peaceable expression of such opinion. In Canada, it supports the right of freedom of expression as enshrined in Section 2 (b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Organizations such as PEN Canada, Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, and all the political parties that were included in the debates have not made a single public statement on this issue.

The deafening silence from the Liberals, NDP, Conservatives and Bloc has been appalling. Meanwhile, they all claim to hold the highest regard for democracy. Yet, they have done nothing to try and protect the Canadian democratic system from the control of the Broadcasters' Consortium. Their inaction has raised the question of whether or not they truly are committed to this country and the rights of its citizens.

I wrote the following letter to the CBC Ombudsman concerning the exclusion issue:

“It is with great sadness that I write this email. I have been a long time viewer of CBC for many years. I will no longer be watching. I feel the CBC has been involved with compromising Canada's democracy. I can not support a network that has behaved in such a way.

“The Broadcaster's Consortium decision to exclude a legitimate political party from the leadership debates is a direct violation of my rights as a Canadian Citizen.

“I will not allow democracy in Canada to be controlled by a small number of individuals.

“I have sold my TV. I am writing this to say bye to CBC. I also request, out of respect for our country, that the Canadian part be removed from CBC's name.

A response was received from Tony Burman the Editor-in-Chief-and Executive Director of CBC News, Current Affairs, and Newsworld, of which a snippet is included below:

"The revised Guidelines say that the Commission ‘no longer requires that debates programs feature all rival parties or candidates’ as long as audiences are ‘informed of the main issues and of the positions of all candidates and registered parties on those issues’ through other programming."

In essence, he is saying that the CBC is in accordance with the Elections Act concerning coverage of political parties. This statement is an insult to Canadians. What Burman is admitting to is that the CBC has met the very minimal requirements of the Elections Act. This admission is coming from our National Public Broadcaster, an entity that has every moral and ethical responsibility to go above and beyond minimal requirements, especially ones that pertain to the democracy of Canada and its citizens. Instead of raising the bar, they have lowered it, as have the rest of the major carriers (Global TV, TVA and CTV).

One would think if they truly do hold the concerns and beliefs of Canadians as their guiding principles, then they would be embracing each and every opportunity to further the variety and enhancing the health of our democracy.

For the second federal election in a row, every Canadian citizen will have the opportunity to vote for the Green Party of Canada. For the second time in a row, not a single Canadian will have been allowed to watch the leader of that party participate in the national debates. That in itself is the very definition of censorship which makes this a Freedom of Expression issue from the perspective of all Canadian citizens.

As with many issues, it is ultimately the consumer that decides. The values and behavior the media expects us to accept without question requires some answers. It’s time that we decide who is welcome into our homes.

****