Alberta
TDF expresses concern over Election Canada’s new mis/disinformation policy
From The Democracy Fund
Written by TDF’s Legal Team
The Democracy Fund sends a letter to Elections Canada and Minister LeBlanc.
Elections Canada has recently developed a policy to monitor and dissuade the publication of “misinformation” and “disinformation.”
In January 2024, it launched its ElectoFacts website to provide “correct information about elections that Canadians can easily access.” Elections Canada claims that it does not intend to establish Elections Canada as “the arbiter of truth” that will actively monitor the accuracy of statements and information distributed by parties and candidates.
However, The Democracy Fund (TDF) fears that the ambiguous language and the apparent lack of legislative authority to engage in such an endeavour will lead to an expansion of the program. Elections Canada has also contacted social media companies to remove “inaccurate” information: this is troubling because it is arguably an infringement of free speech rights, and there appears to be no judicial oversight of this censorship.
Canadians have the right to criticize their government and its processes – even if this criticism is wrong, inapt, trivial, unfair or unjustified. Efforts by the Western governments to constrain criticism using fashionable terms such as “misinformation” or “disinformation” are just state censorship rebranded for modern audiences.
TDF outlined its concerns in a letter to the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer and the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, Dominic LeBlanc.
Our letter is attached below.
February 9, 2024
via email
Stéphane Perrault
Acting Chief Electoral Officer
Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Elections Canada
30 Victoria Street
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0M6
Dear Mr. Perrault,
Re: Elections Canada Misinformation/Disinformation Monitoring
We are a civil society organization and registered charity that defends and promotes civil liberties in Canada. We are writing to express our concerns regarding comments around election “misinformation” and “disinformation” on the Elections Integrity and 1 ElectoFacts website.2
On its Election Integrity website, under “Disinformation or Influence Campaign,” Elections Canada outlines several types of objectionable conduct, namely:
- Elections Canada: Influence campaigns aimed at discrediting parts of the electoral process.
- Political Parties/Candidates: Social media campaign to spread false information about a candidate.
- Electors: Foreign online campaign aimed at specific diaspora communities to influence their vote.
In addition, Elections Canada purports to monitor the “information environment” (the news media, the Web, social media, etc.) to detect:
- Incidents that could affect the smooth administration of a general election or by-election;
- Inaccurate information on the electoral process, which could prevent people from exercising their rights to register, vote or be a candidate; and,
- Social media accounts and websites that impersonate Elections Canada, which could lead to confusion.3
We note that Elections Canada has previously contacted social media companies – including Facebook, Twitter, Google, Snapchat, LinkedIn, Reddit, YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram:
- Elections Canada (EC) engages with digital platforms that have a significant Canadian presence as well as those that have reached out to EC.
- For the 44th general election (GE44), EC worked with Facebook/Instagram, Google/YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, Snapchat, and for the first time, TikTok and Reddit, to establish protocols for reporting cases of false information on the voting process and impersonation of EC.4
The purpose of this contact was to report online content to these platforms and, presumably, have them remove “false information.” This was done without prior judicial oversight and review.
There are a number of problems with this approach to monitoring online information.
First, it is not clear that Elections Canada has the legislative authority to report citizens or their online comments, or attempt to influence platforms to remove “false information.” Even if it did, doing so without judicial review and oversight is arguably improper.5 Where there was authority to regulate “false statements” in the Canada Elections Act6 (“the Act”), we note that the court, in Constitution Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General), held that s.91(1) of the Act breached s.2(b) of the Canadian Charter or Rights 7 and Freedoms.8
Importantly, the legality of prohibiting the publication of “false news” has been adjudicated by Canadian courts, and the relevant Criminal Code provisions have been 9 struck down.10
Second, the ability to identify “misinformation” and “disinformation” requires resolution of one of the most difficult problems in epistemology. Simply put, an assessment of the truth of a statement engages the central questions of epistemology: what is meant by the claim that a statement is true, and under what authoritative conditions can one be certain that a statement is true (“the Epistemic Problem”). This Epistemic Problem has bedeviled philosophers for millennia, and remains unresolved. Until such time as it is resolved, claims to epistemic certainty are unfounded.
There is no evidence that Elections Canada has resolved the Epistemic Problem. It cannot, therefore, arrogate to itself the required certainty on matters of truth or falsehood.
Third, we note that the language used by Elections Canada regarding “false information” is ambiguous. Linguistic ambiguity allows for expansive regulatory powers. Further, the language used does not allow for “false information” that is comedic, parodistic or satirical. As a result, removal or attempted removal of “false information” will be overbroad and imprecise.
Fourth, given the concerns outlined above, it is not clear that Elections Canada could implement any process that would be better at ascertaining truth than citizens using normal human discernment.
Consequently, any removal or attempted removal of “false information” will be an exercise in either arbitrary or politically-motivated censorship. This is particularly troubling because the type of “false information” that attracts attention usually relates to contested or controversial political and moral statements, rather than trivial falsehoods.
Worse still, in our experience, punishment for contravening speech laws is typically inflicted upon minority communities, vulnerable groups and political dissidents: those with privilege avoid sanction.
Finally, attempts to remove “false information” will ultimately result in the erosion of civil liberties and democratic engagement. The reduction in exposure to moral and political information – both true and false – prevents citizens from engaging with complex arguments, and, thereby, diminishes their critical-thinking capacity. For, if the information expressed was correct, participants would have gained the benefit of exchanging their wrong information for correct information. If the information expressed
was wrong, participants would have gained the benefit of intellectual justification for their beliefs, without which they possess not knowledge, but dead dogma.11
For these reasons, we would respectfully recommend that Elections Canada restrict its conduct to publishing factual information about elections and the electoral process. It is safer and more practicable for the citizens as Canada to remain the arbiters of truth.
As always, we would be pleased to meet with you to discuss our concerns and any questions you may have about our position.
Regards,
Mark A. Joseph
Senior Litigation Counsel
c.c.: Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs
- Election Integrity and Security Including Foreign Interference
- ElectoFacts
- Supra, note 1.
- Agreements with social media platforms to address inaccurate information
- Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice), [2000] 2 SCR 1120
- Canada Elections Act, S.C. 2000, c. 9
- Constitution Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General), 2021 ONSC 1224
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.7, Part 1 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11 a
- Criminal Code, RSC , 1985, c. C-46
- R. v. Zundel, [1992] 2 SCR 731
- Chicago. Mill, John Stuart. 2002. On Liberty. Dover Thrift Editions. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
About The Democracy Fund:
Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education. TDF supports an access to justice initiative for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by the government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.
P&H Milling Group has qualified for the Agri-Processing Investment Tax Credit program
Alberta’s food processing sector is the second-largest manufacturing industry in the province and the flour milling industry plays an important role within the sector, generating millions in annual economic impact and creating thousands of jobs. As Canada’s population continues to increase, demand for high-quality wheat flour products is expected to rise. With Alberta farmers growing about one-third of Canada’s wheat crops, the province is well-positioned to help meet this demand.
Alberta’s Agri-Processing Investment Tax Credit program is supporting this growing sector by helping to attract a new wheat flour milling business to Red Deer County. P&H Milling Group, a division of Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited, is constructing a $241-million facility in the hamlet of Springbrook to mill about 750 metric tonnes of wheat from western Canadian farmers into flour, every single day. The new facility will complement the company’s wheat and durum milling operation in Lethbridge.
“P&H Milling Group’s new flour mill project is proof our Agri-Processing Investment Tax Credit program is doing its job to attract large-scale investments in value-added agricultural manufacturing. With incentives like the ag tax credit, we’re providing the right conditions for processors to invest in Alberta, expand their business and help stimulate our economy.”
P&H Milling Group’s project is expected to create about 27 permanent and 200 temporary jobs. Byproducts from the milling process will be sold to the livestock feed industry across Canada to create products for cattle, poultry, swine, bison, goats and fish. The new facility will also have capacity to add two more flour mills as demand for product increases in the future.
“This new facility not only strengthens our position in the Canadian milling industry, but also boostsAlberta’s baking industry by supplying high-quality flour to a diverse range of customers. We are proud to contribute to the local economy and support the agricultural community by sourcing 230,000 metric tonnes of locally grown wheat each year.”
To be considered for the tax credit program, corporations must invest at least $10 million in a project to build or expand a value-added agri-processing facility in Alberta. The program offers a 12 per cent non-refundable tax credit based on eligible capital expenditures. Through this program, Alberta’s government has granted P&H Milling Group conditional approval for a tax credit estimated at $27.3 million.
“We are grateful P&H Milling Group chose to build here in Red Deer County. This partnership willbolster our local economy and showcase our prime centralized location in Alberta, an advantage that facilitates efficient operations and distribution.”
Quick facts
- In 2023, Alberta’s food processing sector generated $24.3 billion in sales, making it the province’s second-largest manufacturing industry, behind petroleum and coal.
- That same year, just over three million metric tonnes of milled wheat and more than 2.3 million metric tonnes of wheat flour was manufactured in Canada.
- Alberta’s milled wheat and meslin flour exports increased from $8.6 million in 2019 to $19.8 million in 2023, a 130.2 per cent increase.
- Demand for flour products rose in Alberta from 2019 to 2022, with retail sales increasing by 24 per cent during that period.
- Alberta’s flour milling industry generated about $840.7 million in economic impact and created more than 2,200 jobs on average between 2018 and 2021.
- Alberta farmers produced 9.3 million metric tonnes of wheat in 2023, representing 29.2 per cent of total Canadian production.
Related information
The British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse. (Photo credit: Alexandra Keeler)
News release from Break The Needle
By Canadian Affairs Editorial Board
Data released this week brought the welcome news that opioid-related deaths in Alberta have decreased substantially since last year. Opioid-related deaths have also decreased in B.C., although not as dramatically as in Alberta.
While the results are encouraging, more work needs to be done. And both provinces, which have taken very different approaches to the drug crisis, need to understand how their drug policies contribute to these results.
Fortunately, B.C. and Alberta both have research centres devoted to answering this very question. But we are disheartened to see that B.C.’s centre, the British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse, accepts funding from pharmaceutical and drug companies.
As Canadian Affairs reported this week, the B.C. centre’s funding page lists pharmaceutical company Indivior, pharmacy chain Shoppers Drug Mart and cannabis companies Tilray and Canopy Growth as “past and current funders of activities at BCCSU — including work related to research, community engagement, and clinical training and education.”
This funding structure raises major red flags. Pharmaceutical and drug companies benefit from continued drug use and addiction. And in a context where B.C. has favoured harm-reduction policies such as safe consumption sites and safe supply, the risk of conflicts is especially high.
Indivior is the producer and manufacturer of Suboxone, a drug commonly prescribed to treat opioid-use disorder. Canada’s drug crisis has driven a surge in demand for prescription opioids to treat opioid-use order, with the number of Canadians receiving Suboxone and similar drugs up 44 per cent in 2020 from 2015, according to the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction.
Indivior is also the subject of at least two class-action lawsuits claiming the company failed to disclose adverse health effects associated with using Suboxone.
In 2021, Shoppers Drug Mart made a $2-million gift to the University of British Columbia to establish a pharmacy fellowship and support the education of pharmacist-focused addiction treatment at the British Columbia Centre on Substance Use. A conflict of interest exists here as well, with pharmacies benefiting financially from continued demand for drugs.
Consider, for example, if B.C.’s centre produced research showing pharmaceutical interventions were not effective or less effective than other policy measures. Would researchers feel pressure to not publish those results or pursue further lines of inquiry? Similarly, would Indivior or Shoppers Drug Mart continue to provide funding if the centre published research in this vein?
These are not the kinds of questions researchers should have to consider when pursuing research in the public interest.
Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.
In response to questions about whether accepting drug industry funding could compromise the objectivity of their research, the British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse referred Canadian Affairs to their website’s funding page. This page states their research is supported by peer-reviewed grants and independent ethical reviews to ensure objectivity.
We would argue such steps are not sufficient, not least because conflicts of interest are a problem whether they are real or perceived. Even if researchers at the centre are not influenced by who is funding their work, the public could reasonably perceive the objectivity of their research to be compromised.
It is for this reason that ethics laws generally require officeholders to avoid both actual conflicts of interest as well as the appearance of conflicts.
It is also why the government of Alberta, in launching their new addictions research centre, the Canadian Centre of Recovery Excellence (CoRE), has taken steps to safeguard the integrity of its work. The government has imposed legislative safeguards to ensure CoRE cannot receive external funding that could be seen to compromise its research, a spokesperson for the centre told Canadian Affairs.
It would be difficult to overstate the importance of the work done by the B.C. centre, CoRE and other centres like it. It is imperative that governments of all levels and stripes have quality, trusted research to inform decision-making about how best to respond to this tragic crisis.
The B.C. government and British Columbia Centre on Substance Abuse ought to implement their own safeguards to address these conflicts of interest immediately.
This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.
Break The Needle. Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.
US lawmakers accuse Pfizer, Eli Lilly of testing new drugs on prisoners in Communist China
From Deal With It: A Cruel, Senseless Fate Ends A Brilliant Career
Ottawa’s tariffs undercut Ottawa’s EV mandate
Rethinking Public Education
-
Agriculture1 day ago
P&H Group building $241-million flour milling facility in Red Deer County.
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoCanada wants to add DEI measures to globalist WHO pandemic treaty
-
Brownstone Institute12 hours agoThe Curious Case of Mark Zuckerberg
-
Crime2 days agoHunter Biden pleads guilty to tax charges, avoids public trial
-
National1 day agoUnemployment Surges as Trudeau’s Policies Wreak Havoc on the Economy
-
International1 day agoTelegram founder Pavel Durov criticizes French authorities in first statement after his arrest
-
International11 hours agoISIS supporter used Canada in terror plot to massacre New York City Jews, motivated by October 7th Hamas attack on Israel: FBI
-
Addictions1 day ago
B.C. addiction centre should not accept drug industry funds