"Instant" members of political parties are accused of stacking nomination meetings for the expected spring election. There is a racial tone to some of the complaints as Indo-Canadians are seen to be joining both the Liberals and the Conservatives in the thousands. In North Vancouver, Ted White, faced a similar challenge with Iranians dominating the signups for the Conservative nomination, but many of their names strangely disappeared from the membership list before the vote. The problem is not that large numbers of one ethic group join a party to participate in the nomination vote; the problem is that most people don't care enough to do the same thing and participate in the party of their choice.

It has long been the case that parties use nomination contests in order to bring new people into politics. Each person who wants to stand for the party of their choice signs up as many members as possible in an attempt to win the nomination. It is not uncommon for the losers to complain about violations of rules.

Barely half of those who are potential voters actually turn out to vote in general elections. The number participating in nomination meetings for the party of their choice is miniscule relative to the total number of voters in any constituency, or even relative to the number that ultimately vote in the general election for the chosen candidate. Most people don't know, and many don't care how political parties choose their candidates. They can be easily confused when losers in nomination fights complain about rule violations and suggest that the Chief Electoral Officer might have to get involved.

In Canada, political parties set their own rules on how candidates are selected. The federal Liberals allow their leader to by-pass constituencies and appoint candidates, as happened with Stephen Owen. In most cases parties set rules that set age and residency requirements, and sometimes time limits on how long a person must be a member of a party before being allowed to vote in a nomination meeting. They may also limit the number of membership application forms any potential organizer can have.

In the U.S., nomination procedures are set by state law. Each state is different but many states use "primaries". A primary is an election run by the state for the purpose of selecting a party's candidate. In an "open primary" anyone can show up on voting day, declare themselves in support of a particular party and vote for the candidate of their choice. The only restriction is that no one can vote in two primaries; someone who votes in the primary for the Democrats cannot also vote in the primary for the Republicans. It is argued that is sufficient to deter significant party cross over where people might support the potential candidate most likely to lose to the party they really support. Some states have "closed primaries" where only registered members of a party can vote in the primary for that party. Registration for a party includes registering to vote and declaring party preference. Voters can switch parties by simply re-registering to vote and changing their party designation.

When losers in nomination fights say that the Chief Electoral Officer should get involved, it should be kept in mind that the Officer can do nothing more than make recommendations. If the election laws of Canada or the provinces are going to change, the governments of the day must make those changes. Canada could adopt a U.S. style system of primaries. Some people might object to any level of government holding a voter registration that specified which party they support. A major disadvantage to a primary system is that the cost of seeking a nomination would increase dramatically, becoming almost as expensive as it is to run in a general election. As is the case in the U.S., the best fundraiser has a significantly higher chance of winning the primary.

As an alternative to primaries, election laws could be amended to specify rules that would have to be followed when political parties hold their nomination meetings. It is puzzling why anyone would trust the political party that forms the government to change election laws if that party cannot be trusted to govern itself and set its own nomination rules. That is why cries for government involvement in nomination contests is nonsense. If people don't' like the way a party is conducting itself, they can either get involved to change the rules, or they can choose another party. Only sore losers think that government involvement is necessary to change nomination procedures.