The most unhinged people in the province may now have access to the personal information of everybody who lives here, and there's nothing we can do about it
The revelations Jen Gerson made to Alberta elections officials should have resulted in immediate action. That they did not underscores the need for the Canadian government and its provincial counterparts to impose much tougher restrictions on the use and dissemination of voter lists.
This was a huge breach of privacy, one that the Canada Elections Act (S.C. 2000, c. 9) is practically set up to facilitate.
More generally, Canadians ought to ask much tougher questions of ALL political parties and their rights and responsibilities.
I hope there are criminal charges laid against David Parker and other principals of the Centurion Project. In my view a criminal inquiry should be called to determine whether there was collusion between Alberta elections officials and the UCP government of Danielle Smith (designed to frustrate or prevent the investigation of this breach).
Thank you to Jen and The Line for publishing this article.
Oh thou Astute Defender Of Democratic Will Of The People, beg pray which is the petition that should be invalidated ??? This one or that other one ? Or perchance both petitions should be invalidated ???
Because only toxic dictates from the toxin producing center Ottawa permanently ruled by "Liberals" are allowed ?
Reminder that the UCPs new Protection of Privacy Act introduced severe penalties for privacy breaches: Maximum Fines: Up to $200,000 for individuals and $1 million for organizations (e.g. APP and the Republican Party) found guilty of offences. Hopefully government prosecutes and oversees the destruction of these personally identifying data.
POPA applies to public bodies. Political parties are not public bodies. We should regulate political parties under PIPA (the private sector privacy Act) like BC does, but Alberta’s PIPA explicitly excludes them from application. They fall under no comprehensive privacy law. The only penalties that may apply are from Elections Alberta.
You are certainly justifiably ticked off. What hope do any of us as simple citizens have when even a journalist such as yourself is not taken seriously?
I note that the federal parties have decided to exempt themselves from the privacy rules that govern everyone else.
There is a case to be made for a new (?) form of journalism that is basically the story behind the story. I am sure it exists but it is always superseded by the actual story itself. This article here is one such useful illustration for such a writing.
I am glad that you wrote this story - regardless of it being because of the truncated timelines from EAB.
And good to read about actual instances of journalistic ethics being followed. Congratulations.
And looks like your letter is basically cited in the Globe and Mail. You should perhaps update this story here with the absolute BS response from EAB when asked about your prior email to them.
Great scoop. I hope this kind of work is part of the expansion that you and Matt have been talking about - to at least have some record for future historians as to why Canada fell apart if not to actually change anything in this time.
If the purpose of a PER is to facilitate reasonable outreach in the context of an election (very legitimate purpose) I wonder why the entire list should have ever been distributed to this party who ran one (?) candidate in one electoral district. Why do they need my elector information in Edmonton to campaign for Cam Davies in Olds Didsbury Three Hills? I could not vote for him even if I wanted to.
Young Jennifer, I have to say that this is terrifically well done!
As you note, Elections Alberta definitely has some 'splainen to do.
I'm not particularly worried about my name and such getting out - in this case - but, as you note, that just isn't the case for folks for whom privacy is a real safety issue.
This evidence has to do with misuse of the voters' list and for that, the horsemen do need to be involved - and they are involved! Now, having said that, in what way does that connect with the referendum petition?
The fact that some goof appears to have wanted to misuse the information on the voters' list in no way negates that a whole lot of folks signed the petition in good faith of their own volition, without being prompted. Very much including me!
So, tell me again why you want to remove my democratic rights. If the petition has sufficient signatures you will get your chance to provide your (apparent) negative opinion at the time the vote is held.
Yes, If both the separate and stay in Canada sides all have the required number of valid signatures then let both of them be on the ballot. Someone tell me why one side was required to have fewer signatures?
I don't know why that particular area was amended. I just don't. Is the change fair? I think that it may be fair. I can see where someone might feel otherwise. On the other hand, when is a good time to make changes if you feel that your law is insufficient, inappropriate, blah, blah, blah?
So, everyone has their own thoughts. When the controversy broke out I wanted to see what some other countries require and found that the results are quite varied. Make up your own mind.
I checked and the number of signatures needed to get a measure on a ballot is only 100,000 for the entire country of Switzerland as opposed to about 177,000 in Alberta. Why is that something to think about? Well, Switzerland has a greater population than Alberta but needs significantly fewer signatures.
By contrast, in California, which has a population of about 39,000,000, one needs either five or eight per cent of the population, depending on the type of question.
Saskatchewan - yes, our neighbor to the east - has similar referendum legislation and there it is required to have fifteen per cent of eligible voters which would be somewhere about 125,000.
Many other jurisdictions have legislation allowing citizens to initiate petitions for referendums; I have enquired only about the above examples but you may wish to look further.
What a horrifying story, thanks for sharing Jen. I hope this is investigated, and the leak is found, and heavy prosecution follows. Is it possible Smith is part of this leak given her very close relationship to Parker?
Voters lists are and have been in many peoples hands. When I was an MLA in the 90s everyone that wanted a voters list had one. And I have been involved in campaigns since my elected years. I will bet big money that Forever Canadian have voters lists. The press and the forever people will try to make this a big deal but it won't effect the separatist movement one bit
I am not at all impressed that this happened. I share Jenn’s concerns. Can anyone help me with context - how many people rightfully have access to this list? Anyone who volunteers with any party? Would it be hard for me to start a party and get the list? Why does this list exist anyway? What format do people get the list in (specifically, is there any way for those who have the list to prevent it being copied without notice)?
The revelations Jen Gerson made to Alberta elections officials should have resulted in immediate action. That they did not underscores the need for the Canadian government and its provincial counterparts to impose much tougher restrictions on the use and dissemination of voter lists.
This was a huge breach of privacy, one that the Canada Elections Act (S.C. 2000, c. 9) is practically set up to facilitate.
More generally, Canadians ought to ask much tougher questions of ALL political parties and their rights and responsibilities.
I hope there are criminal charges laid against David Parker and other principals of the Centurion Project. In my view a criminal inquiry should be called to determine whether there was collusion between Alberta elections officials and the UCP government of Danielle Smith (designed to frustrate or prevent the investigation of this breach).
Thank you to Jen and The Line for publishing this article.
The entire petition should be invalidated.
Oh thou Astute Defender Of Democratic Will Of The People, beg pray which is the petition that should be invalidated ??? This one or that other one ? Or perchance both petitions should be invalidated ???
Because only toxic dictates from the toxin producing center Ottawa permanently ruled by "Liberals" are allowed ?
This is the kind of thinking that results in Canada becoming a worse and worse shithole.
Reminder that the UCPs new Protection of Privacy Act introduced severe penalties for privacy breaches: Maximum Fines: Up to $200,000 for individuals and $1 million for organizations (e.g. APP and the Republican Party) found guilty of offences. Hopefully government prosecutes and oversees the destruction of these personally identifying data.
POPA applies to public bodies. Political parties are not public bodies. We should regulate political parties under PIPA (the private sector privacy Act) like BC does, but Alberta’s PIPA explicitly excludes them from application. They fall under no comprehensive privacy law. The only penalties that may apply are from Elections Alberta.
You are certainly justifiably ticked off. What hope do any of us as simple citizens have when even a journalist such as yourself is not taken seriously?
I note that the federal parties have decided to exempt themselves from the privacy rules that govern everyone else.
There is a case to be made for a new (?) form of journalism that is basically the story behind the story. I am sure it exists but it is always superseded by the actual story itself. This article here is one such useful illustration for such a writing.
I am glad that you wrote this story - regardless of it being because of the truncated timelines from EAB.
And good to read about actual instances of journalistic ethics being followed. Congratulations.
And looks like your letter is basically cited in the Globe and Mail. You should perhaps update this story here with the absolute BS response from EAB when asked about your prior email to them.
Great scoop. I hope this kind of work is part of the expansion that you and Matt have been talking about - to at least have some record for future historians as to why Canada fell apart if not to actually change anything in this time.
You know, for a group that is ostensibly for Albertans these separatists sure show a lot of contempt for most Albertans.
My gratitude for your efforts here Jen.
Ron, don’t be an asshole in the comments. That’s a warning. Next is a ban.
If the purpose of a PER is to facilitate reasonable outreach in the context of an election (very legitimate purpose) I wonder why the entire list should have ever been distributed to this party who ran one (?) candidate in one electoral district. Why do they need my elector information in Edmonton to campaign for Cam Davies in Olds Didsbury Three Hills? I could not vote for him even if I wanted to.
Young Jennifer, I have to say that this is terrifically well done!
As you note, Elections Alberta definitely has some 'splainen to do.
I'm not particularly worried about my name and such getting out - in this case - but, as you note, that just isn't the case for folks for whom privacy is a real safety issue.
Definitely, some 'splainen needed.
Well that seems more than enough evidence to bring in the Mounties. And stop the referendum.
This evidence has to do with misuse of the voters' list and for that, the horsemen do need to be involved - and they are involved! Now, having said that, in what way does that connect with the referendum petition?
The fact that some goof appears to have wanted to misuse the information on the voters' list in no way negates that a whole lot of folks signed the petition in good faith of their own volition, without being prompted. Very much including me!
So, tell me again why you want to remove my democratic rights. If the petition has sufficient signatures you will get your chance to provide your (apparent) negative opinion at the time the vote is held.
Yes, If both the separate and stay in Canada sides all have the required number of valid signatures then let both of them be on the ballot. Someone tell me why one side was required to have fewer signatures?
I don't know why that particular area was amended. I just don't. Is the change fair? I think that it may be fair. I can see where someone might feel otherwise. On the other hand, when is a good time to make changes if you feel that your law is insufficient, inappropriate, blah, blah, blah?
So, everyone has their own thoughts. When the controversy broke out I wanted to see what some other countries require and found that the results are quite varied. Make up your own mind.
I checked and the number of signatures needed to get a measure on a ballot is only 100,000 for the entire country of Switzerland as opposed to about 177,000 in Alberta. Why is that something to think about? Well, Switzerland has a greater population than Alberta but needs significantly fewer signatures.
By contrast, in California, which has a population of about 39,000,000, one needs either five or eight per cent of the population, depending on the type of question.
Saskatchewan - yes, our neighbor to the east - has similar referendum legislation and there it is required to have fifteen per cent of eligible voters which would be somewhere about 125,000.
Many other jurisdictions have legislation allowing citizens to initiate petitions for referendums; I have enquired only about the above examples but you may wish to look further.
your hollering up a dead horses ass
Holy shit.
Magnificent work by Jen Gerson.
Epic and perhaps unprecedented institutional failure by Elections Alberta and the GOA.
Heads should roll. Resignations must occur.
We should now assume all of our data is available to anyone who wants to pay for it.
Again, amazing work by Jen Gerson.
Wow.
What a horrifying story, thanks for sharing Jen. I hope this is investigated, and the leak is found, and heavy prosecution follows. Is it possible Smith is part of this leak given her very close relationship to Parker?
They sat on it for a month. Wtf elections alberta?
Voters lists are and have been in many peoples hands. When I was an MLA in the 90s everyone that wanted a voters list had one. And I have been involved in campaigns since my elected years. I will bet big money that Forever Canadian have voters lists. The press and the forever people will try to make this a big deal but it won't effect the separatist movement one bit
I am not at all impressed that this happened. I share Jenn’s concerns. Can anyone help me with context - how many people rightfully have access to this list? Anyone who volunteers with any party? Would it be hard for me to start a party and get the list? Why does this list exist anyway? What format do people get the list in (specifically, is there any way for those who have the list to prevent it being copied without notice)?