Stephen Woodworth: 2016 Change to Liberal Party Membership Rules Further Opened the Door to Foreign Interference

Liberal delegates vote for the new party constitution at the 2016 Liberal Biennial Convention in Winnipeg on May 28, 2016. (The Canadian Press/John Woods)

Commentary

In 2016, changes made to the Liberal Party’s membership requirements opened the door to a new way for the Communist regime which rules China to take a direct hand in the governance of Canada.

Not much talked about today, but Justin Trudeau did away with Liberal Party membership and replaced it with “registration.”  This might seem innocuous, but it served the purposes of the Communist regime in an important way because it made the Liberal Party vulnerable to influence by foreign citizens who have not even adopted Canada as their permanent home. I’ll explain.

Before the 2016 change, the Liberal Party of Canada belonged to people who paid a fee to become members. That is still the case for the national Conservative, New Democrat, and Green parties.

Why is this important?

Elections Canada forbids political parties from accepting money from anyone who isn’t a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada. As a result, you can’t join the Conservative, New Democratic, or Green parties if you aren’t at least committed to Canada as your permanent home. Those parties charge a membership fee and can’t legally accept money from anyone who isn’t at least a permanent resident.

Not so the Liberal Party of Canada. Anyone can “register” to belong without payment of any fee. The rules set by the Liberal Party’s National Board of Directors permit registration to anyone if they “ordinarily live in Canada.” The important point is that their living in Canada does not need to be permanent. That standard wording has been left out. It’s enough if someone ordinarily resides in Canada, even if only temporarily. This widens eligibility from people who have genuinely immigrated to Canada to include people with no intention of making Canada their home.

By “registering,” people gain all the privileges of membership, including the right to select candidates even if they are supported by the Communist regime. Non-permanent residents are even able to participate in selecting the next Liberal leader under this system. No permanent commitment to Canada is required. Even the Chinese ambassador could “register” to help nominate candidates or to select the next Liberal leader if he signed to say he supported the purposes of the party.

People putting down permanent roots might still be vulnerable to “police station” tactics by agents of hostile foreign powers, but they are more likely to act in the best interests of their adopted country than temporary sojourners.

No one has ever accused the authoritarian Communist regime that governs China of being slow to exploit vulnerabilities. Is it any wonder that the regime exercised its influence over Chinese citizens not committed permanently to Canada to support Trudeau’s Liberal Party, which intelligence leaks indicate Beijing found more favourable to its interests, and to participate in nominating candidates sympathetic to its policies? Political interference was almost inevitable, or at least predictable.

Why should we think that other hostile authoritarian regimes won’t also try to exploit the same loophole if they can?

Without further investigation we won’t know how many temporary residents helped candidates favoured by Beijing win Liberal nominations. However, even if Canadian security officials had not found existing political interference by the Communist regime, there’s no doubt whatsoever that the Liberal leadership has invited such interference by enticing non-permanent residents, who lack firm commitment to the collective welfare of Canadians, to make the Liberal Party their home. Doing that violates exactly the concern behind the Elections Canada prohibition which forbids parties from accepting money from non-permanent residents—keeping influence out of the hands of people with no permanent stake in Canadians’ welfare.

Canadians who are concerned about this type of loophole opening our elections to foreign interference can ask for a law to forbid all political parties from inviting non-permanent residents to influence party affairs as members in the same way that parties are already forbidden from inviting non-permanent residents to influence their affairs with financial support.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.