The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION

New report questions Canadian Ukraine election monitoring missions

  • Print

OTTAWA - A new internal government report has once again raised questions about the Harper government's penchant for sending large teams of Canadian election monitors to Ukraine.

The March report, prepared by an outside consultant for the Foreign Affairs Department, is the latest in a series of internal government assessments that raise red flags about the missions. The reports began in 2004 under the Liberals and have been repeatedly embraced by the Conservatives, most recently in May.

Ottawa sent about 350 people to monitor the May 25 presidential ballot in Ukraine in a Canadian-led bilateral mission. Approximately 150 went as part of a separate multinational effort led by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which is seen as the most credible international body for conducting such missions.

The Canadian Press obtained a copy of the independent audit of Canada's Election Observation Missions program, known as EOM, which notes that the multilateral OSCE missions are widely viewed as a much better idea than the Canadian bilateral ones.

The consultants, Plan:Net Limited, presented the Foreign Affairs Department with its 195-page report on March 20.

On April 23, Harper announced Canada was sending 500 observers to monitor the Ukraine mission, and that 350 of them would be part of a bilateral mission under a Canadian banner.

"As has been noted, generating visibility through a bilateral presence in EOMs comes with its dangers," the report said.

"EOM best practices suggest that a decision to give greater emphasis to bilateral election observation could have implications for the reputation of Canada amongst other donors, recipient countries, and multilateral organizations.

"Does Canada want to continue to be a credible and respected player in the field of EOM? Or do political imperatives trump development goals, at least in the short term?"

Despite raising those questions, the report offers "a qualified yes" in support of Canada continuing to contribute to both kinds of missions, to promote the country internationally while participating in multilateral global efforts to promote good governance.

Foreign Affairs is defending the missions, saying they help advocate Canadian values, such as supporting democracy.

"Canada actively supports both bilateral and multilateral election observation missions as effective mechanisms for supporting free and fair elections," department spokesman John Babcock said in an emailed response to questions.

"This is part of Canada's broader support for the promotion of democracy, a key Canadian value."

Canada also sent hundreds of observers to Ukraine's parliamentary elections in 2012 and its presidential election in 2010, in addition to participating in OSCE missions.

After the Liberals' first and only Ukraine observer mission in 2004, a separate internal report concluded that they "should not be considered as a precedent but only as a 'last resort option' for future Canadian observer missions."

Since then, that advice has been repeatedly ignored.

The most recent March report addresses another problem in international election monitoring practices that Canada continues to ignore: allowing expatriates to monitor elections in their native lands.

On the most recent mission to Ukraine, at least half of those taking part were of Ukrainian-Canadian descent.

The government says having a large Ukrainian-Canadian contingent on its last monitoring team was an asset, in part because they speak the local language.

"Canadian diaspora groups and communities represent valuable and knowledge-rich resources, including with respect to linguistic capabilities, and as such they are an important consideration in developing missions," said Babcock.

Canada has about 1.2 million people of Ukrainian descent, and the strong outpouring of government support for Ukraine in its current conflict with Russia is seen by many observers as a way to court domestic electoral support within Canada.

The Plan:Net report cited pros and cons of the bilateral missions, and found it scores points for the government among certain "ethnic constituents."

Under pros, the report said: "Of direct interest to Canadian ethnic constituents; for example, Ukraine/Haiti; as well as to GoC for being seen by Diaspora as involved."

The report says Canadian bilateral missions are of more use to Canada than others nations, saying their main purpose is to "promote the sending country entirely."

Observers in Ukraine had the words "Mission Canada" displayed prominently on their clothing, while their activities were reported by Canadian and Ukrainian journalists, the report says.

"While this certainly is an effective method of promoting Canadian involvement, it is not consistent in any way with EOM best practices."

Follow Mike Blanchfield on Twitter at @mblanchfield

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes


  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.


Make text: Larger | Smaller


Your Vote: The Blue Bombers All-Time Team

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • Young goslings jostle for position to take a drink from a puddle in Brookside Cemetery Thursday morning- Day 23– June 14, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • Geese take cover in long grass in the Tuxedo Business Park near Route 90 Wednesday- Day 28– June 27, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)

View More Gallery Photos


Do you plan on attending any of the CMHR opening weekend events? (select all that apply)

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google