(OTTAWA) The Conservative committee reviewing the disqualification of Patrick Brown from the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leadership race has concluded that the party has the evidence it needs to recommend his withdrawal from the race.
Posted at 9:55 p.m.
Its decision, released Friday evening, contains new allegations that Mr. Brown used bank money orders to purchase memberships and authorized non-compliant membership sales through a portal.
“Mr. Brown has had ample opportunity to address these serious concerns,” Ian Brodie, chairman of the party’s leadership election organizing committee, said in a statement.
The committee surprised party members and Canadians earlier this month when it voted 11 to six to disqualify Mr Brown from the race. The latter has since launched his campaign for his re-election as mayor of Brampton, Ontario.
Patrick Brown’s lawyer had filed a notice of appeal of the decision to oust him from the race, which the party said was based on a recommendation from its returning officer.
The Dispute Resolution Appeals Committee had to decide whether the leader had the evidence necessary to recommend Mr. Brown’s removal.
According to the committee, the evidence included allegations that Mr. Brown authorized more than 500 sales of non-compliant membership cards.
“The candidate’s correspondence on this issue indicates both an unwillingness and an inability to provide the (chief returning officer) with information about who was accessing the portal to register memberships that the (party) had deemed non-compliant,” indicates the decision.
She argues that Mr Brown left the issue pending for two weeks and gave “non-committal answers”.
The decision also responds to an allegation that Mr. Brown violated federal election law, which was brought to the attention of the party by a whistleblower.
After Mr Brown was ousted, Debbie Jodoin, a longtime party organizer, came forward as the one to speak, alleging that Patrick Brown had arranged for a third-party company to pay her to work on his campaign.
Mr Brown denied wrongdoing and said the party had not provided enough details to his campaign for him to respond properly.
In its ruling, the Disputes Committee says the party offered Patrick Brown a chance to provide exculpatory evidence. “He didn’t,” the decision states.
“Instead, the candidate offered an explanation of innocent error and an offer to reimburse all company expenses involved. It’s an excuse, not exculpatory evidence.
The ruling says the party has reviewed the allegations Mr Brown has faced, as well as how he has responded.
Regarding issues with bank money orders, the disputes committee said the party had received 78 bank money orders attached to membership forms that appeared to be from the same person.
The ruling says Mr Brown told the party he raised the issue with the individual in question, who said the allegation was false.
He says the party ended up with reports that Patrick Brown’s campaign had bought memberships inappropriately.
“When confronted with this evidence, the candidate simply chose to deny the allegation without providing a satisfactory explanation,” the decision reiterates.