Home

19 October 2001

Dear [Liberal Rural Caucus Member],

This letter is being sent to the 29 members of the National Liberal Rural Caucus who won their seats in the 2000 election with a plurality of less than a 10%.

One purpose of this letter is to express our deepest concern that the National Liberal Rural Caucus has become the major impediment to the animal cruelty provisions in Bill C15b being enacted in its present form. Indeed, the parent bill was split over the objections of the Minister because of the rural caucus.

Secondly, we would like to make it clear to the members of the caucus that it has become evident to Environment Voters that, to all intents, the debate over Bill C15b is no longer about substance, but rather politics.

And thirdly, we would like to make the members of the rural caucus fully aware of the political environment in which their deliberations are taking place. In the past, legislators could make laws about the environment and animal welfare with political impunity. The environmental and animal welfare movements were not active at the electoral level. There was no electoral benefit — no votes to be harvested — for enacting good animal welfare or environmental laws. Conversely, there were no votes to be lost — no political cost — for a poor animal welfare or environmental protection record. Today, because of Environment Voters, that is no longer the case. There will be measurable political consequences if Bill C15b is not passed in a form that will improve the animal cruelty provisions of the Criminal Code.

The expert legal advice that Environment Voters has received is that if the amendments proposed for the animal cruelty portions of the bill that would make it acceptable to the rural caucus are adopted, the bill would be effectively neutralized and serve no practical purpose in dealing with animal cruelty criminal offences. This is unacceptable. The measures to address animal cruelty in Bill C15b are a very modest improvement and there is no rational reason to oppose them. Other countries have more progressive animal welfare laws than Canada and continue to have healthy agricultural industries and other industries that depend on the use of animals.

Environment Voters is a non-profit organization that campaigns in elections — at the electoral district level — to benefit political parties and politicians who have demonstrated measurable progress on environmental and animal welfare issues, and to exact a political cost from those who haven't. "Benefit" and "cost" are measured in votes won or lost.

Environment Voters was founded solely to address the untenable political situation whereby despite strong, enduring public support for progressive, responsible environmental and animal welfare legislation, the Canadian government has failed to move forward in either of these areas. The record of the Liberal Party is particularly poor, having reversed much of the progress made by the Progressive Conservatives under Prime Minister Mulroney.

Environment Voters campaigns in electoral districts that current polling and voting histories suggest can be influenced by a vote shift of less than 5%. Environment Voters does not hobble itself by necessarily campaigning on environmental and animal welfare issues, but rather employs local and other issues that are specifically relevant to the most politically volatile areas in an electoral district. Elections tend to be won or lost in these marginal areas. It's worth appending the fact that the 3^rd party spending restrictions in the Canada Elections Act — which have been struck down by the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench and even if upheld by the Supreme Court on appeal — are no impediment to running well-funded independent campaigns at the electoral district level.

By making environmental and animal welfare issues electorally significant, Environment Voters hopes to put the environment and animal welfare issues on a more equal footing with industry and other powerful political interests when public policy and legislation is being decided in cabinet and caucus.

Environment Voters is working to change the political environment such that there will be a clear political benefit measured in votes if a government enacts sound animal welfare and environmental legislation.

Environment Voters understands that it is not possible for any government to enact sweeping changes and reforms in one mandate. Any reform no matter how desirable must be such that a society and an economy can respond without undue disruption or hardship. And, the transitions caused by reforms must be supported economically by government and the society at large and not borne fully by those who are directly affected. While sweeping changes and reforms cannot be tolerated by a society, small incremental changes not only can but should. Bill C15b is a small, incremental change for the better, one that all industries can tolerate.

Environment Voters is not aligned with any political party nor any part of the political spectrum. In its past campaigns, Environment Voters has supported and opposed Liberal, Progressive Conservative, and NDP candidates. In the last federal election, Environment Voters opposed the Hon. David Anderson, Minister of the Environment, because of his failure to make progress on important and promised environmental legislation, such as endangered species protection, and supported the Hon. Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice, because of promised changes to the Criminal Code that would modernize the animal cruelty provisions.

Members of the National Liberal Rural Caucus are under intense pressure from agricultural and other industry organizations to render the animal cruelty provisions of Bill C15b ineffective. The arguments put forward by the lobbyists and advocates against Bill C15b have degenerated and can best be described now as alarmist and hysterical. Those who advocate improved animal welfare legislation are even being deviantized and associated with terrorism.

It would seem that those who oppose Bill C15b have abandoned rational discussion for fear mongering. It seems they are prepared to take any measure, to say any thing, to exploit any fear, to prevent even the most innocuous improvements in federal animal welfare legislation. The reports we are receiving suggest that many members of the National Liberal Rural Caucus are being won over by these extremist tactics and are being convinced that there are more votes in cruelty than compassion.

We would like to make it clear that there are not more votes in cruelty than compassion. Twenty-nine members of the rural caucus represent electoral districts where a less than 5% shift in the vote — which would zero a 10% plurality — would likely be a determining factor on who might win the seat. In the 1999 Ontario election, Environment Voters targeted seven Progressive Conservative candidates for defeat. Only three returned to Queen's Park. The average vote shift caused by Environment Voters was 5.6%, measured by comparing results in polls where Environment Voters did and did not campaign. Whether Environment Voters campaigns in favor of or in opposition to a Liberal incumbent depends on the progress the Liberal government makes on environmental and animal welfare issues, such as those embodied in Bill C15b.

It appears that, thanks to the hysterical submissions of industry and agricultural lobbyists, the actual merits of Bill C15b are no longer at issue. What is at issue is the political consequences of the final form of the bill. It's possible that if Bill C15b is passed in its present form, without amendment (Environment Voters' preferred scenario), the agricultural and other industry lobbyists may encourage their members to exact a political cost from some members of the rural caucus or the Liberal Party. However, as Bill C15b's alleged adverse affects on lawful animal use practices exist solely in the propaganda of the lobbyists such that the actual effect on farmers, researchers, hunters, and anglers will be nil, it is unlikely that much will be made of it on election day. However, for Environment Voters and other like-minded organizations, failure on the part of the Liberal Party to pass modest, effective improvements in animal cruelty legislation, as promised, will guarantee campaigns in marginal electoral districts during the next election.

It's worth repeating that Environment Voters campaigns not only to exact a political cost for a poor environmental and animal welfare record, but also, just as diligently, to elect politicians and parties that make measurable progress. The Hon. Anne McClellan likely owes her 1.5% 733 vote plurality to the Environment Voters campaign in her electoral district. Environment Voters was the only 3^rd party campaigning on her behalf.

Those Members of Parliament who represent marginal electoral districts bear the brunt of the governing party's poor record — an unintended consequence of our "first past the post" electoral system — but they also enjoy the benefits of a good record when Environment Voters campaigns for their re-elections.

The view from here is that the debate over Bill C15b is now entirely political. The merits of the bill are of little consequence. The industry and agricultural lobbyists have made their position clear: they are not willing to make any compromise to help prevent cruelty to animals no matter how egregious, wanton, or unnecessary the acts of cruelty may be. Any movement forward is to be resisted. If this is to be the fate of all future animal welfare and environmental legislation in the Parliament of Canada — a political stonewall with its foundation in the rural caucus — then the work for environmental and animal welfare progress must be performed elsewhere: at home in the electoral districts during elections. Failure on the part of the rural caucus to pass Bill C15b in a form that will improve the animal cruelty laws in Canada will demonstrate with certainty to the animal welfare and environmental movements and the millions of Canadians who support them that there is no alternative but to seek redress on the campaign trail and in the ballot box.

Yours sincerely,

Stephen Best

Founding Director.

cc. Murray Calder, Chair, National Liberal Rural Caucus

The Hon. Anne McClellan, Minister of Justice

Attached: Ranking by Plurality of Liberal Caucus