Database privacy raised in Question Period (with video)

a blog about news and politics by steve janke

Database privacy raised in Question Period (with video)

Monday, October 22, 2007 at 07:00 PM Comments: 27

Previous Post Next Post

The issue of how constituent and voter databases track and share data has been raised in Question Period. In an exchange between Government House Leader Peter Van Loan and Liberal MP Garth Turner, I seem to have been caught in the crossfire.

Read the transcript of watch the video.

My story about how the Liberal Party database system seems to work has more legs than I expected. Frankly I thought it was bit too technical to be of much interest beyond a limited circle of readers.

Apparently I was wrong. Again. Not the first time and it won't be the last.

Today, in Question Period, the post was used by House Leader Peter Van Loan, and earned a scathing response from Garth Turner, as reported in Maclean's by Kady O'Malley:

He may not be on the payroll of the Conservative party (or Canada's No Longer All That New Government), but the party research bureau definitely owes blogger Steve "Angry in the Great White North" Janke a beer for the countless hours he devotes to digging up dirt on the Liberals.

During Question Period today, no less a personage than House Leader Peter Van Loan used Janke's research to deflect questions on the voter/constituent database maintained by Conservative MPs, which the Liberals claim violates not only the privacy of the aforementioned constituents, but inappropriately mixes government and political information within the same system.

I await the chorus of accusations that I am paid to publish material hand-delivered to me from the PMO. In fact, that notion has now become part of the official record. Read Liberal MP Garth Turner's comment about my credibility:

Hon. Garth Turner (Halton, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, on Friday I asked the government about its relationship with Conservative CIMS database.

The hon. House leader said it was a political party database divorce from government MPs, but I have here the authorization form signed by Conservative MPs installing this database in their offices.

Therefore my question is simple. Why is a political party database sitting on the taxpayer funded computers of members of Parliament?

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I was very puzzled when I got this question on party databases last week so I did some research and I found the following.

The software enables both candidates and elected officials in their respective roles to properly and easily manage their campaign and constituency offices. Members of the House of Commons are using this application for their day to day business. Since 1997 it has been the software of choice for every election and byelection of both federal and provincial elections.

The package enables elected officials to track issues, correspondence in their constituencies as well as donations, membership and voter intention.

It is not CIMS. It is ElectSYS, the Liberal Party of Canada software application.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

Order, please. Obviously the popularity of the hon. member for Halton has risen dramatically over the summer but we have to be able to hear the question despite the enthusiasm of him standing in the House. We have to be able to hear what he says. The hon. member for Halton now has the floor. Order, please.

Hon. Garth Turner (Halton, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I hope Canadians will notice that the hon. House leader did not answer that important question and he has now quoted from a Conservative blogger who's credibility is extremely compromised.

My question remains. Does the hon. House leader believe it is an ethical practice to have a Conservative Party database sitting on the computers of his MPs? Yes or no, ethical or not?

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I was actually quoting from the website of The AIT Corp.: "Giving you the edge through superior campaign and constituency management...client base: Federal Liberal Party of Canada".

It says one can do issue tracking, use the case layer to link files with issues, search wizards to help retrieve information by issue, case status, open date and assignment, in fact voting intention and voter participation and then there is my favourite privacy issue. It says one can even track birth dates and send them congratulatory notes. I guess it is time for him to go to the byelection with or without his database.

I'm shocked. Beyond shocked. Extremely compromised credibility?

I thought I had no credibility whatsoever with Liberals.

The mainstream media has picked up on the database story:

Liberal MPs use a constituent database that has some of the same invasive privacy capabilities as the maligned Conservative party system, according to a promotional web site for the software.

Peter Van Loan, the Conservative House leader, happily recited Monday the potential tools touted by The AIT Corp for its ElectSYS database.

Van Loan told the House of Commons those features include tracking voter intention and tracking birthdays and anniversaries in order to send greeting cards.

The Liberals say that they've created distinct (though presumably 100% compatible) databases:

But Liberals say they have two distinct databases, one paid for by MPs to manage constituent case files and one paid for by the party for partisan purposes.

Although both systems were developed by the AIT Corp., data is not shared between the two. Both systems, AdminElect and ManagElect, are listed on the company web site.

Interesting that this point was not brought up on the recorded Question Period exchange.

You can watch the hilarity ensue for yourself. The transcript never does justice to the hooting, clapping, and, in this particular case, a standing ovation, that makes up the theatre that is Question Period:

Addendum: A new entry for my Quotes page.

Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary

Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Peter Van Loan Conservative Party Garth Turner Liberal Party Canada ManagElect AdminElect privacy

Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!

Trackbacks

URI: http://haloscan.com/tb/agwnblog/244270

Click to read the latest news

Trackback Submission Form

Comments

If someone could find a way to wedge Question Period into our US Constitution I'd be greatly appreciative. I watch the UK (C-SPAN) and Canadian (CTV) Question Periods just for their sheer theatre. Maybe the US House chamber needs sword lines.

Posted by: Captain Ned at October 22, 2007 07:17 PM

"Obviously the popularity of the hon. member for Halton has risen dramatically over the summer..."
Maybe in the Hon. Member for Halton's mind.

Once again, Steve, great job. It means your research is not simply ether-filler.

Posted by: Gabby in QC at October 22, 2007 07:18 PM

Poor Garther, lost again. How many smack downs can one person endure?

Posted by: Libby at October 22, 2007 08:01 PM

Well done Steve!

Posted by: mecheng at October 22, 2007 08:01 PM

Isn't having two databases key? In the US, the fundraising arm of the Republican Party paid for mailing Rosh Hashanah cards with Bush's family, not the taxpayers. I don't understand why taxpayers are subsidizing the Conservative Party's findings that they want to target Jews and Asians in Thornhill but not blacks. If Conservatives want to get into that stuff, do it one their own money. Are you really happy paying for that stuff?

Posted by: catherine at October 22, 2007 08:11 PM

Can YOU say SMACKDOWN!

Garth is the LEADER in being smacked down in the house.

LMAO

Posted by: Halton Resident at October 22, 2007 08:12 PM

Garth, I know you're reading this. Let's recall your condescending words to Steve...

"Dear Mr. Janke:
Perhaps you should spend more time researching your articles, lest your credibility be further impacted."

Turner, you got owned in QP today. That must have stung. I think you should suck it up and admit that Steve did his homework and you did not.

Posted by: Jim at October 22, 2007 08:16 PM

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSMACK!!!!!!!!!!

(red hand imprint in Garthie's face)

Loser!!!!!!!

Good job, Steve!

Posted by: Werner Patels at October 22, 2007 08:25 PM

Oh my God. That video just made my week. Garthy just got humiliated in front of the whole country and I doubt Dion will let him up again any time soon.

Steve, Jim is right. I think Turner owes you one heck of a big apology!

I wouldn't hold my breath though.

Posted by: Paul M at October 22, 2007 09:12 PM

On a Non-Garth note; every time I see Peter Van Loan in QP or otherwise in the media he continues to impress me. He is one sharp cookie.

Posted by: Paul M at October 22, 2007 09:25 PM

More interesting, if Garth is willing to use confidential materials he had access to while he was a Conservative, are the Liberals maybe a little bit wary of what confidential Liberal documents he might wave around if they tick him off?

And yup, Garth got owned!

Posted by: Hunter at October 22, 2007 09:37 PM

Does "Parliamentary Privilege" extend to words spoken about a member of the public, or does it only protect MPs for what they say about each other in the House?

If it doesn't extend beyond elected politicians, then can Steve sue Garth for slander or defamation?

Posted by: Tom at October 22, 2007 09:49 PM

I just love magic shows. Especially Liberal ones. They actually fool a lot of people. Unfortunately, the magician's talent is in providing you with the circumstances with which you can trust your own preassumed assumptions thereby making a fool out of you, at your own expense. The Liberal Party is in need of better magicians. The current batch just isn't performing as expected. They haven't fooled me in years.

Posted by: Paul MacPhail at October 22, 2007 10:14 PM

Huh what? Garth Turner said something? Whatever. I'm more interested in what merge.csv is doing.

Posted by: Steve Janke at October 22, 2007 10:27 PM

Hunter, you raised a good point about Garth's usage of the CPC database when he was a Conservative. The important question that should be asked of Garth is "Why did he use this system as a Conservative if he has misgivings about it now?"
Becoming a Liberal doesn't suddenly make one become ethical, look at recent history. It's suggests just the opposite.

Posted by: Paul MacPhail at October 22, 2007 10:30 PM

LOL - even the Speaker had some fun at Garth's expense - that must be unsual, even for such a popular MP !

Posted by: Concerned Torontonian at October 22, 2007 10:41 PM

Okay, so I see all of you conservatives don't care that Harper uses tax payers money to make powerpoint slides saying the conservatives won't waste their time on blacks because they are non CPC accessible and to do specific targetting of other racial, ethnic or religious groups. I guess conservative these days doesn't have anything to do with responsible use of taxpayers money.

Posted by: catherine at October 23, 2007 04:00 AM

and I should have added, conservative these days seems to have some bigotry thrown in too. but, hey, who cares here.

Posted by: catherine at October 23, 2007 04:03 AM

Thanks for bringing that one up catherine. Actually, I wrote a piece on the Building Communities slidedeck, and how it is part of a larger strategy to change the status quo on voting patterns in this country, and how it is in response to other voting changes that have already occurred that have nothing to do with the Conservatives. I based it on a fascinating paper done on the subject, so it's not just my opinion (those pure opinion pieces are probably really boring). Give the post a read -- it just deals in generalities and not in any specific group, but you might find it interesting.

Posted by: Steve Janke at October 23, 2007 05:56 AM

I doubt you will find evidence of the Liberals saying in print and at taxpayers' expense are not going to bother targetting blacks in Thornhill. However, if both the Liberals and Conservatives use public funds to do their fundraising exploiting ethnic/racial/religous profiling gleened from data mining, confidential information obtained in their roles as MPs, or whatever, then all the more reason to take the stand that this is completely inappropriate use of public funds.

Posted by: catherine at October 23, 2007 06:47 AM

"but the party research bureau definitely owes blogger Steve "Angry in the Great White North" Janke a beer for the countless hours he devotes to digging up dirt on the Liberals."

The interesting words are "digging up dirt on the Liberals" he does not deny that there is dirt to dig up,but actually admits it is there. What a wanker.

Posted by: Pissedoff at October 23, 2007 10:14 AM

Catherine - I find it quite rich that you criticize the Tories for allegedly wasting taxpayers money for partisan purposes when the Liberals did it in spades during Adscam. Of course, you may not be a Liberal supporter, and if you aren't I apologize. However, when you slam the Tories for allegedly doing what the Liberals did to a far, far greater extent (see Gomery report), you invite people to draw the conclusion that you are indeed a Liberal supporter. And, if you are, you are guilty of a double standard that amounts to hypocrisy.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at October 23, 2007 11:10 AM