Last month, federal Green leadership candidate Elizabeth May was adamant her cross-country climate change tour wasn't a campaign event and shouldn't be counted toward her leadership expenses. But, yesterday, her national communications director Christopher Ian Bennett confirmed in an email "a more than required portion of the (tour) will be paid for by the campaign," which has a $50,000 spending limit.

Earlier, Public Eye exclusively reported the climate change tour talks were being advertised on Ms. May's Website as "future campaign events." And, at one of her speeches, a prominent backer was spotted outside one of those events selling Green memberships in support of the former Sierra Club of Canada executive director's leadership bid.

Ms. May, who maintains she "hasn't cut an ethic corner in her life," earlier explained those sales weren't approved by her campaign. And she says she didn't know the talks were being described on her site as "campaign events" - removing them after Public Eye told her about those advertisements. Nevertheless, Ms. May's opponent David Chernushenko asked the party's election fairness committee to look into the matter.

And, after seeking clarification from Elections Canada, Green compliance officer Celine Deschambault informed the party's executive director Jean Langloisl that, "It is as we suspected, some of the cost" for so-called "multi-purpose" trips "will have to be apportioned."

In an interview with Public Eye, Ms. Deschambault declined to say if that meant Ms. May's climate change tour - or a portion thereof - would need to be included as a campaign expense. Nor does her email say whether the Greens consider Ms. May's tour to be a multi-purpose trip.

When asked whether these latest developments would change Ms. May's position on her climate change tour, the campaign issued the following statement: "We are pleased to be working cooperatively with Elections Canada, and have appreciated their help in ensuring our campaign finances are in accordance with all requirements and rules. Further to this, we have taken their recent notice regarding our recent tour/campaign expenses to our finance team and will continue to act in full accordance of the law."

Mr. Bennett later confirmed the Elections Canada clarification would mean a portion of the tour would be paid for by Ms. May's campaign. The following is a complete copy of Ms. May's statement, as well as the correspondence between Ms. Deschambault and Mr. Langlois. A version of this article was originally published in today's edition of 24 hours.

***

Hi Jean,

Below is the response we received from Elections Canada regarding the "Multi-purpose trip / event" question we submitted on June 29th 2006. It is as we suspected, some of the cost will have to be apportioned. Maybe we should meet later on today to discuss this further.

Sincerely,

Celine Deschambault
Compliance Officer
Green Party of Canada / Parti Vert du Canada
PO / CP 997 Station B Ottawa ON K1P 5R1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RenedeCotret, Michele
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 9:29 AM
To: Celine Deschambault
Subject: Leadership contest: Multi-purpose trips or events

This is further to your request for clarifications regarding the reporting requirements for multi-purpose trips and multi-purpose events that take place during a leadership race.

YOUR QUESTION:

Multi-purpose trip
A multi-purpose trip is one in which a leadership contestant may travel to a location for a purpose unrelated to the leadership campaign. While there, the contestant conducts a campaign event, even though the travel expenses associated with that event are not being paid for by the leadership campaign.

If a leadership contestant is combining a campaign event and a non-campaign event on the same trip, how is this to be accounted for in order for the party, as well as the leadership contestant, to fully comply with the Canada Elections Act? Is there a need for a proportional amount of the travel costs and personal expenses (that were paid for by the non-leadership campaign event) to be apportioned to the leadership campaign? Do only the travel local travel costs between the two events constitute campaign expenses? Does the candidate have to account for some of the travel and/or accommodation expenses as campaign expenses?

If so, what formula is used by Elections Canada to calculate the portion of the travel expenses that are to be accounted for as part of the leadership campaign? How is the reporting of the travel expenses and other expense to be done?

OUR ANSWER:

IF THE CANDIDATE PLANS HIS/HER AFFAIRS TO COMBINE TWO PURPOSES - ONE RELATED TO THE CONTEST AND ONE NOT - SO THAT BOTH CAN BE ACHIEVED IN THE SAME TRIP, THE COSTS SHOULD BE APPORTIONED REASONABLY BETWEEN THE EVENTS DEPENDING ON THE EVENT TO WHICH EACH COST MIGHT MOST REASONABLY BE ATTRIBUTED.

YOUR QUESTION:

Multi-purpose event
This then generates a secondary question: What determines whether or not something (an event) constitutes a campaign event?

Example: During an event that is unrelated to the leadership campaign, a leadership contestant sells a party membership. Should this be counted as a campaign event even if the membership sale was not the purpose of the event?

Another example: A leadership contestant has a speaking engagement on a subject other than the leadership race. The speaker is introduced as a leadership contestant among other things, answers questions from the audience about their leadership bid, alludes to their vision for the Party, or refers the audience to their leadership campaign website. Which of these, if any, would result in the event being considered a leadership campaign event by Elections Canada?

Numerous other examples exist. The Green Party of Canada and our leadership contestants would greatly appreciate a definition or guideline from Elections Canada as to how to determine whether or not something constitutes a campaign event.

As you know our leadership campaign is well underway, and a timely clarification is needed to ensure the party and all our leadership contestants know how to comply with the act. We appreciate all of your help in this matter and look forward to hearing from you soon.

OUR ANSWER:

IF, DURING A LEADERSHIP CONTEST, AN EVENT IS USED, OR REASONABLY PERCEIVED TO BE USED, TO PROMOTE THE CAMPAIGN OF THE CONTESTANT OR TO OPPOSE THE CAMPAIGN OF ANOTHER, THE FULL EVENT IS A LEADERSHIP CAMPAIGN EXPENSE.

LEADERSHIP CONTESTANTS SHOULD DISCUSS THE APPORTIONMENT OF COSTS WITH THEIR AUDITOR AND SHOULD BE READY TO DEFEND SUCH APPORTIONMENT SHOULD THERE BE A COMPLAINT.

Michele Rene de Cotret
Avocate principale et directrice adjointe /
Senior Counsel and Assistant Director
Services juridiques / Legal Services
Elections Canada / Elections Canada
257 rue Slater St.
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0M6

***

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ian Bennett
Sent: 26 July 2006 19:02
To: Sean Holman
Subject: Elizabeth May Response

Hi Sean, statement from Elizabeth below:

We are pleased to be working cooperatively with Elections Canada, and have appreciated their help in ensuring our campaign finances are in accordance with all requirements and rules. Further to this, we have taken their recent notice regarding our recent tour/campaign expenses to our finance team and will continue to act in full accordance of the law.

My campaign has been one of honesty and integrity, and I believe that a vibrant democracy requires transparency, and accountability. My campaign is in complete support of their recent report. We thank elections Canada for a such a prompt response to the recent inquiries, and look forward to our convention at the end of the month.

Elizabeth May
_______________________________
Christopher Ian Bennett
Chief Communications Strategist
NEW SCHOOL MEDiA