sda2.jpg

January 20, 2006

Massive Irregularities: Edmonton Centre

Via campaign manager Victor Marciano;

Laurie Hawn, Conservative Candidate in Edmonton Centre, has filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Elections Canada after massive voter list irregularities were uncovered by his campaign.

For some time, there have been rumors of election irregularities in Edmonton Centre. At an all candidates meeting with Elections Canada on January 4, 2006, it was revealed that two buildings had been struck from the electoral rolls because they were not residences. In reality, these buildings were both mailbox stores.

Several days later, the Laurie Hawn campaign identified a third non-residence building which sells mail boxes and reported it to Elections Canada.

A few days ago, the Laurie Hawn campaign was alerted, via e-mail, by an Edmonton lawyer that:

"Lots of [Anne McLellan] supporters are enumerated at their downtown office address instead of at their houses. One of them was bragging about how many times he could vote liberal (sic) based on the number of leases he had in her riding."

In reaction to this e-mail, the Laurie Hawn campaign acquired a City of Edmonton map which listed all buildings and their street addresses and began thoroughly checking the revised voters list. Despite checking less than half the polls, here are some irregularities that have been identified:

  • Almost 100 apparently nonexistent addresses in Edmonton's downtown core - in some cases, the addresses listed fictional residences in between two genuine buildings
  • Hundreds of people registered to vote out of their law offices, medical offices, accounting offices, and Government of Canada offices - in some cases these may be genuine errors, but in other cases, entire families are registered to vote out of high rise office space
  • Dozens of people registered to vote out of office towers, but who did not list a suite number, causing the address to read similarly to ordinary residences - in many cases, these people are also registered to vote in other ridings using their home addresses, and in other cases, voters living in other ridings are only registered in Edmonton Centre
  • Dozens of people registered to vote out of small mail box locations and from self-storage yards - there is no legitimate way for a person to appear on the list of Electors from a self-storage yard
  • Eighteen people registered to vote out of a truck stop
  • People registered to vote out of karaoke bars, lingerie stores, dance lounges, galleries, etc...

    The deadline for revising the list of Electors has now passed, and these irregular voters will remain on the list. In some cases, they have already voted in the advance polls and some of these irregular voters may have voted in previous elections, and may have had an impact on the results in the riding of Edmonton Centre.


  • Update - Edmonton Journal article "mix-up fixed, official says".

    Mixup?

    The Laurie Hawn campaign has filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Elections, asking that he review the 2004 final voters roll and determine if any of these fraudulent voters cast ballots in that election.

    The campaign has also asked him to prosecute anyone who voted more than once - in Edmonton Centre and again in another riding.

    Our campaign has also requested that voters be required to complete a voter declaration and undertake the elector's oath when voters registered at fraudulent addresses attempt to cast ballots in this election.

    The Laurie Hawn campaign takes voter fraud very seriously. Any individual who intends to vote illegally in Edmonton Centre should be aware that our campaign will be carefully monitoring the election, and will pursue any violation with Elections Canada to the fullest extent possible.


    Posted by Kate at January 20, 2006 10:54 PM
    TrackBacks

    Even Liberal Leadership Fleeing To Tories from Captain's Quarters
    The election-eve weekend started off rather strangely for Canadians, or perhaps not, considering the circumstances of the election itself. In a late move, the Liberal president of an Toronto riding has endorsed the Conservative candidate as a protest a... [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 1:48 AM

    Illegal Multi Voting from Blogging Party of Canada
    A complaint was filed with Commissioner of Elections Canada in regards a few oddities when it comes to voting here in Edmonton Center. A press release from Laurie Hawns office, the Conservative candidate, made some startling accusations. From the rel... [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 3:46 AM

    Possible election fraud may be brewing in Canadian from Tel-Chai Nation
    Small Dead Animals and Lost Budgie Blog report on what may be attempts at election fraud in Canada's national elections. [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 11:16 AM

    This could be big from Autonomous Source
    Kate at Small Dead Animals has the text of a complaint to Elections Canada by the Conservative Candidate in Edmonton Centre. It alleges many, many irregularities in the voters list for that riding:Almost 100 apparently nonexistent addresses in Edmonton... [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 1:48 PM

    Canadian Voting Irregularities: Sound Familiar? from Riehl World View
    This below appears to be only one of several troubling developments in the pending Canadian election.According to Student Vote’s homepage, In less than two years, the program has reached over 700,000 students. If your son or daughter came home from [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 2:48 PM

    This could be big from Complacent Nation
    Click for full article from Autonomoussource.com Kate at Small Dead Animals has the text of a complaint to Elections Canada by the Conservative Candidate in Edmonton Centre. It alleges many, many irregularities in the voters list for that riding: - [Read More]

    Tracked on January 21, 2006 8:11 PM

    One last thing from Rantastic
    Tomorrow is the election (or, as we call it around the campaign office, "e-day"). The Liberals are pushing hard to bring you one last week of scandal, and it's been a doozy. Prisoners are, again, getting energy rebate cheques. Liberals pushed through [Read More]

    Tracked on January 22, 2006 12:11 PM

    Comments

    off topic

    But did anyone see the new abortion ad. Deplorable!

    Posted by: rightistheway at January 20, 2006 11:00 PM

    Man - you couldn't make this stuff up. Those liberal bastards better lose this damn election. Its literally like all Liberals are corrupt and Stephen Harper is a saviour from god (praise be to him).

    Posted by: BorboAlberta at January 20, 2006 11:01 PM

    Over on Bourque right now I also noticed that had a story on kids in schools being given official ballots to do a mock voting with. Concerned parents were wondering what happened to these ballots in the end. Were they shredded? Did they somehow manage to get into official ballot boxes? One thing is for sure, elections canada is either grossly incompetant or something very fishy is going on.

    Posted by: Harvey Birdman - Attourney at Law at January 20, 2006 11:05 PM

    Brings into question some of the previous elections results.

    Posted by: Scott at January 20, 2006 11:08 PM

    If Paul Martin wants full and free access to abortion..is he willing to allow partial-birth abortions?

    Where does Paul Martin draw the line on abortion?

    Posted by: Ed Tucker at January 20, 2006 11:09 PM

    "The Laurie Hawn campaign takes voter fraud very seriously."

    What about the R.O. and their staff ?
    What party appointed them ?


    Posted by: Mugs at January 20, 2006 11:13 PM

    Where can I go to see the abortion ads? I will never understand why left-wingers choose to define themselves by being pro-abortion. Weird.

    Posted by: Trent at January 20, 2006 11:15 PM

    The Liberal criminals have usurped every institution that has been put in place to protect the citizen from big dictatorial governments. I believe our elections are a sham. This has been going on since '93 that I know of. The school story fits in nicely with the McLellan story--McLellan won her last riding with a 'found' ballot box.
    If these ballots are used so loosely in schools how many other situations are there that real ballots have been used and 'gone missing'? It is just a good investigation by this reporter and the parents that even brought this to light--

    As for abortion--I am against it--but, if we could get retroactive abortion for the LPOC I would vote for it!

    Posted by: George at January 20, 2006 11:18 PM

    The governing party appoints the RO

    Posted by: George at January 20, 2006 11:19 PM

    The Liberal Party of Canada will leave a lasting legacy: A legacy of unprecedented widespread corruption.

    Posted by: MikeR at January 20, 2006 11:21 PM

    Is this not something that the RCMP should be looking at RIGHT NOW???????

    I suppose it would be irresponsible to think that the Liberal party might know how to circumvent the election rules hey?? Screechin Annie would never stoop to those levels of desperation would she?

    Wake up Ontario, get a backbone for once.

    Posted by: Sid at January 20, 2006 11:22 PM

    ...and all this with a permanent voters list?! Either Elections Canada is utterly incompetent, or someone in the bureacracy/gov structured things to permit such abuse. THIS SHOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE! Any half-ass competently written database software should check for such old-fashioned, well-understood, often-used Tammany Hall ...words fail me (this is rare).

    Hello Florida! Hanging chads? Ha! the "conscience of the world" has just done you one better.

    Henry

    Posted by: Henry at January 20, 2006 11:22 PM

    Do the Mounties have any jurisdiction regarding this?

    If this is true, about the voter irregularities, it is hardly surprising given the Liberal penchant for "Mugabi Politics".

    Posted by: Brett at January 20, 2006 11:24 PM

    Is it too late to call in the foreign observers?

    Posted by: greg at January 20, 2006 11:27 PM

    If anything is worthy of RCMP investigation it is voter fraud. This is really sickening, but not surprising anymore.

    Posted by: EBD at January 20, 2006 11:40 PM

    It's a crime to commit this kind of voter fraud. So the police would charge someone if it's proved that they committed fraud.

    P.S.: Some prominent figures are on the list of inelligible voters. Andy Hladyshevsky, the Liberal candidate for Edmonton-Strathcona is on the list!

    Posted by: Scott at January 20, 2006 11:41 PM

    The second last time McLellan won, it was by how many votes? Eight, or something?

    Posted by: EBD at January 20, 2006 11:41 PM

    Heh. The Ukrainians in the riding could probably help organize foreign observers. A few of them have had experience with that fairly recently.

    Posted by: PM at January 20, 2006 11:42 PM

    Just so you know I got the Edmonton-Strathcona info from the Edmonton Journal at: http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=5aba4263-d1cd-4177-bbca-360db762fefa&k=22377&p=2

    Posted by: Scott at January 20, 2006 11:43 PM

    This is outrageous, another in a long list of outrages. Stand up for Canada...take to the streets. Oh, wait, we're too civilized for that. Does make your blood kinda boil though.

    Posted by: Moose Javian at January 20, 2006 11:45 PM

    "Is it too late to call in the foreign observers?"
    Don't do it! They may send us Jimmy Carter.

    Posted by: Bill at January 20, 2006 11:52 PM

    Reminds me of Ward 10 elections in Calgary. You want to see cover up, Silly Hall not only stopped the investigation, but had city taxpayer money pay for half or more of the guilty candidate's lawyer fees.

    Hey you don't need to go far to get dirt and corrpution -

    This is happening in Alberta...and we want to seperate???

    Posted by: tomax at January 20, 2006 11:55 PM

    Voter registration fraud is legal in the State of Washington. See this story, one of hundreds and hundreds written in the past year from my home state:
    http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/005584.html

    So what are you Albertans complaining about??

    Posted by: SpaceNeedleBoy at January 20, 2006 11:56 PM

    That's unbelievable, if it wasn't so believable:

    * Liberal candidate allegedly bribing an NDP candidate to drop out of the election race

    * Phone call from Liberal candidate's office falsely accusing a Conservative Party candidate of accusing a Conservative Party MP and former pastor of rape

    * Liberal Party forced to return $1,142,818.27 in money stolen from taxpayers to fund their party

    * Liberal Government House Liberal leader allegedly misclassifying property sold to a well-known Liberal Party supporter that he made a huge 3-month profit

    * Liberal Prime Minister who approves ads attacking our soldiers for electoral gain after ordering them to a combat zone

    * Multiple ongoing RCMP, OSC, & SEC investigations involving the Finance Department and PMO

    * Liberal at the Gomery Adscam Inquiry saying his life was threatened

    * And on and on and on, large and small, but increasingly large and challenging to our Democracy and sense of decency

    * According to school children, official Elections Canada ballots on the loose in the '406'

    * And now alleged Shenanigans in the election campaign of a former JUSTICE MINSTER and current Deputy Prime Minister!

    Who can vote for these people?

    Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 20, 2006 11:58 PM

    More on how voter registration fraud is perfectly legal in Washington State - and please note, the attached legal opinion letter is from the Preston Gates Ellis law firm, home of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff:

    http://soundpolitics.com/McDonald20051114.pdf
    http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/005327.html

    Methinks some American election fraudsters have become "embedded" in the local Elections Canada office in Edmonton.

    Posted by: SpaceNeedleBoy at January 21, 2006 12:02 AM

    "It isn't the votes that count- it's who counts the votes." (First posted two or three months ago.)

    Posted by: dave at January 21, 2006 12:03 AM

    If you have filed a tax return , and checked the box for elections Canada you get a voters card. You don't have to be a citizen

    If you are not a citizen and you go to the polls with a photo ID and a hydro bill, you can vote.

    if you are a student and U of T and vote in the student poll. You can then drive home and vote in your own riding

    It is fraud as far as I am concerned, and Paul Dithers favourite organization the UN should be here monitoring. Either that or the American Military, because the UN is as corrupt as Paul Martin and Chairman Mo Strong

    Posted by: carfix2000ca at January 21, 2006 12:04 AM

    ...wonder how many foreign strippers were included in the Edmonton Centre count...

    Just like Ward 10 in Calgary.

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:06 AM

    Okay, I was being silly about the school ballot thing. I admit that.

    And the reason for that is that the Liberals are doing everything else to subvert our Democracy.

    Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 21, 2006 12:06 AM

    has this made the national media?

    Posted by: carfix2000ca at January 21, 2006 12:09 AM

    hey kate...would you be offended if i said to you, in the words of a famous conservative, mr mckay in some recent advice for one woman (and perhaps all women?)...just step aside, follow us men (in keeping with the natural biblical order of things), or better yet, just "go back to your knitting!"

    btw, i think the new conservatism could garnish perhaps even 50% support eventually (i.e., from men) as it appeals to male primal tendencies which have tended to have been quashed by feminism over the past couple of decades - so who knows, could a male ('take back society') revolution be in the works? now there's what some may consider a common sense revolution indeed!

    standing up for canada, standing up for men!

    Posted by: New Blue Man at January 21, 2006 12:10 AM

    When they asked Annie about the $16,000.00 she had claimed for damaged signs, she said it was just a typo. That must be what this is as well. I mean, the Deputy Prime Minister of Canada would never do something like this just to win an election, would she?

    Posted by: Platty at January 21, 2006 12:12 AM

    EVERYONE HEAD FOR THE HILLS, THE LIBERAL DYKE IS ABOUT TO BLOW OPEN!!!

    Egad, just like New Orleans, the mess and stench after this is all done is going to be gross....

    cheers
    tom

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:13 AM

    Mordechai Richler once wrote a column in the National Post,about how the Union Nationale and the Liberal Party paid kids in Montreal to go to the cemetaries and copy the names off gravestones, so they could be added to the voters' list. I guess they still haven't changed tactics much.
    My God how can anyone be this power hungry? Maybe Canada needs a Revolution, not an election. Sharpen the guillotine!

    Posted by: dmorris at January 21, 2006 12:17 AM

    Welcome to Bananada. ORANGE REVOLUTION anybody?

    Posted by: Hans Rupprecht at January 21, 2006 12:19 AM

    mr dithers and chairman mo can go suck CO2 in China where CSL builds ships and is exempt from Kyoto. correct me if I'm wrong.

    Posted by: kelly at January 21, 2006 12:20 AM

    Got an interesting email from a business associate of mine living in Edmonton Centre.

    Apparently she checked her Elections Canada registration and there are "two" of her living at her house...only problem is one of them is a guy with the exact same name...

    Meaning someone is using her name to vote -you guessed it - Liberal.

    I'll see if she wants to share her name, some of you might know her.

    Me thinks this scam is the torpedo that sinks the Liberal ship for good.

    cheers
    tom


    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:34 AM

    This might be a solution (I'm not an expert; maybe someone here is)

    On Monday, when an elector presents his voter card (the one we get in the mail) can he be asked for ID? If the address on the ID doesn't match the address on the card can that be used to determine possible fraud?

    Posted by: Norman Lorrain at January 21, 2006 12:39 AM

    Well, jeeeze. What's a poor weasel lieberal candidate to do if he/she can't win at the voting booths honestly?

    Of COURSE they have to stuff the ballot boxes in their favor. After all, it's in the best interests of Canadian democracy. Otherwise, those nasty anti-Canadian/Lieberal-values parties might actually win.

    Posted by: Joe Canuck at January 21, 2006 12:40 AM

    Picked this story up on Captain's Quarters. Thanks to whoever linked it.

    These people need to stroll off into the wilderness without a compass. Everything about their campaign stinks .... negative ads, misrepresentation, slurs, calls to vote for Bloc, attacks on Alberta ... and now this bullshit.

    Posted by: Aidan Maconachy at January 21, 2006 12:42 AM

    Lets see. Lawyer Andy Hladyshevsky says he has always voted in Strathcona, were he is running in this election for the Liberals. And now we learn that he is also registered to vote in Edmonton Centre, Anne McLellan's riding.

    He is a lawyer, this Liberal candidate. He says he has known for several weeks that he was incorrectly been on the Edmonton Centre voter list. He says "This is a subject that has caused a lot of discussion around the kitchen table for the last couple of weeks", yet he didn't have time to phone the local elections office. I gues he couldn't phone the elections office, this Liberal candidate, because he had been so busy discussing with his family "for the last couple of weeks" the subject of his being on the voters list in two ridings.

    I assume Elections Canada will be appropriately vigilant in cross-referencing voter registrations lists from the various Edmonton ridings for the last few elections with those from Edmonton Centre. Many people who reside outside of Edmonton Centre work there. The big Government of Canda building, for example, is right downtown. Great view, btw.

    How very odd that this would be happening in the only Liberal riding in Alberta, a riding where Anne MacLellan once won by a margin of twelve votes.

    Mr. Hladyshevsky should remove himself immediately as candidate. He is a lawyer, and his excuse for not correcting this serious matter for two weeks, and only then when it was brought into public focus, just doesn't wash.

    Posted by: EBD at January 21, 2006 12:42 AM

    Kate, I suppose you know this by now. I visit the BBC everyday to keep up on the latest communist spew. Imagine my shock to see your lovely familiar face on the front page! Nice.

    Posted by: Tom Penn at January 21, 2006 12:43 AM

    ON THE NEWS, in the last election Ralph Klein was asked what he thought about an Anne's win. He said - "Anne's a great lady, I like her."

    The media man asked, "What about Laurie Hawn"? Ralph goes, "Who? Laurie Hawn? Don't know her".

    Hawn is not impressed with Ralph K.

    Birds of a feather, guess uncle Ralph is eating crow...

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:50 AM

    Can somebody in Edmonton Centre publically write the RCMP and ask them to investigate this (as the NDP did for the Income Trust investigation)? Send a copy to the MSM to ensure that it gets publication. I don't buy for a second that it's too late. These IDIOTS have names on the ballots and they will have to go the polling stations to cast their votes. Let's have the cops waiting for them. Electoral fraud is punishable by up to a 5 year prison terma and it would be nice to see these people who take away our democratic right to a fair vote locked up in jail. Let's not let this one slide.

    As an aside, I got an "extra" voter's registration card in the mail this year and I immediately shredded it. I really, really, really want the Tories to clean up but not at the expense of my principles.

    Posted by: Maps Onburt at January 21, 2006 12:50 AM

    I'm hoping there's a misprint in the Journal article or that Hawn mis-spoke, when he was quoted as saying that he wants changes including "a requirement that everyone show identification when they vote".

    Is it not already a requirement? Somebody please tell me that it is...

    Posted by: EBD at January 21, 2006 12:53 AM

    Final comment here: I strongly second, and feel relieved to see, the sentiments expressed by Maps Onburt.

    Posted by: EBD at January 21, 2006 12:55 AM

    Is it possible to demand the use of indelible, purple ink in the riding? I'm not joking about this. It should also be used anywhere in the country where persons with no fixed address are allowed to vote--like in Toronto.

    Posted by: andycanuck at January 21, 2006 12:58 AM

    Can you imagine what Paul's confessionals must be, each week he goes? Must spend hours doing penance so as to be ready for the next week of sins. Amazing.. Maybe he can get a job as a Tele-Evangelist, I'm sure there always openings..

    Posted by: Marmot Days - Victoria at January 21, 2006 12:58 AM

    Don't forget that as part of the Gomery Report our tax dollars were laundered throught the various ad programs (including ones for the RCMP) and this money was then used illegally in various ridings in Quebec for a number of elections. The Libs have never disclosed which ridings.

    Expecting the RCMP who are already implicated in money laundering leading to electoral fraud to investigate this electoral fraud is a bit of stretch. Its time to call Jimmy Carter.

    Posted by: Fritz at January 21, 2006 12:58 AM

    EBD - nope, no id required, although they can 'challenge' you to prove who you are.

    Thing is I never hear of any challenges made.

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 1:00 AM

    The link of Victor Marciano's blog is:

    http://whatittakestowin.blogspot.com/

    Posted by: Deaf_Tory at January 21, 2006 1:02 AM

    Section 6 of the Canada Elections act says, "Subject to this Act, every person who is qualified as an elector is entitled to have his or her name included in the list of electors for the polling division in which he or she is ordinarily resident and to vote at the polling station for that polling division."

    Section 8 says, "(1) The place of ordinary residence of a person is the place that has always been, or that has been adopted as, his or her dwelling place, and to which the person intends to return when away from it. (2) A person can have only one place of ordinary residence and it cannot be lost until another is gained. (3) Temporary absence from a place of ordinary residence does not cause a loss or change of place of ordinary residence. (4) If a person usually sleeps in one place and has their meals or is employed in another place, their place of ordinary residence is where they sleep. (5) Temporary residential quarters are considered to be a person's place of ordinary residence only if the person has no other place that they consider to be their residence. (6) A shelter, hostel or similar institution that provides food, lodging or other social services."

    According to clause 8(4), if some people are registering in Edmonton Center when they don't in fact sleep there, then they are in violation of the Act. Speaking as someone who does sleep there, I'd like to ask Elections Canada to tell them to take flying leap at a rolling doughnut off a long pier.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 1:03 AM

    Re sleeping at address... big government building... union employees... they take naps during the day... hence, two legal residences...

    Posted by: Richard Evans at January 21, 2006 1:19 AM

    On identifying oneself to vote...

    Section 144 of the Canada Election Act states that "(1) A deputy returning officer, poll clerk, candidate or candidate's representative who has doubts concerning the identity or right to vote of a person intending to vote at a polling station may request that the person show satisfactory proof of identity and residence. (2) A person may, instead of showing satisfactory proof of identity, take the prescribed oath. (3) Once an elector has been given a ballot, no person shall require the elector to show proof of identity or take an oath."

    Section 145 of the Canada Election Act states that "(1) Subject to subsection (2), a person who refuses to show satisfactory proof of identity, to take an oath required by this Act or to reply to a question regarding their entitlement to vote at a particular polling station shall not receive a ballot, be admitted to vote or be again admitted to the polling station. (2) If an elector refuses to take an oath because he or she is not required to do so under this Act, the elector may appeal to the returning officer. If, after consultation with the deputy returning officer or the poll clerk of the polling station, the returning officer decides that the elector is not required to take the oath, and if the elector is entitled to vote in the polling division, the returning officer shall direct that the elector be again admitted to the polling station and be allowed to vote."

    Section 146 of the Canada Elections Act states that "If a name and address in the list of electors correspond so closely with the name and address of a person who demands a ballot as to suggest that it is intended to refer to that person, the person is, on taking the prescribed oath and complying in all other respects with the provisions of this Act, entitled to receive a ballot and to vote."

    Section 147 of the Canada Elections Act states that "If a person asks for a ballot at a polling station after someone else has voted under that person's name, the person is entitled to receive a ballot and to vote, after having taken the prescribed oath and satisfied the deputy returning officer as to their identity and entitlement to vote at the polling station."

    Section 148 of the Canada Elections Act states that "If the name of an elector has been crossed off in error from an official list of electors under subsection 176(2) or (3), the elector shall be allowed to vote after taking the oath referred to in subsection 144(2), after the deputy returning officer or the poll clerk has verified with the returning officer that their name was crossed off in error."

    Section 162 of the Canada Election Act states that each poll clerk shall "... (f) indicate, if applicable, on the prescribed form that the elector has presented identification or taken an oath and the type of oath, ...".

    Section 549 of the Canada Election Act states that "(1) When an oath or affidavit is authorized or directed to be taken under this Act, it shall be administered by the person who by this Act is expressly required to administer it and, if there is no such person, then by the Chief Electoral Officer or a person designated by him or her in writing, a judge, the returning officer, an assistant returning officer, a deputy returning officer, a poll clerk, a notary public, a provincial court judge, a justice of the peace or a commissioner for taking affidavits in the province. (2) All oaths or affidavits taken under this Act shall be administered free of charge. (3) No person shall take falsely an oath that is provided for by this Act. (4) No person shall compel, induce or attempt to compel or induce any other person to take falsely an oath that is provided for by this Act."

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 1:22 AM

    Tom, I should have clarified that I live in Edmonton-Spruce Grove, but I've worked in Edmonton Centre for both this and the past election, not only because Laurie is a fine man, but because I believe that Anne has done serious damage to Canada, and not benefited Edmonton Centre in any visible way. She lives in a riding with high crime, including gun and knife offences, and drugs. I understand that per capita, Edmonton has more murders than Toronto. Anne has been silent, absent and ineffective.

    There would be cause for dancing in the streets across Canada if we had a Harper CPC win over the Martin Liberals, a Hawn win over McLennan, and an Any Body win over Stronach.

    About finding out today that I was dually registered as a man and also a woman - is it a Liberal plot or Elections Canada bungling? I don't know. I told the phone staff that last time I checked I was female, and there was only one of me.


    marilynburns

    Posted by: Marilyn Burns at January 21, 2006 1:24 AM

    This is just Edmonton. Can you imagine T.O., Vancouver etc.?
    I think it's naive in the least, criminal at best, to think our electoral system can not be corrupted, manipulated. If there's a will there's a way. Obviously no-one learned anything from the last federal election or from the Ward 10 fiasco in Calgary. Or...maybe they did and just don't care?

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 1:28 AM

    Thanks for correcting me Marilyn about where you live, my bad, still point made, here's a live person who was affected by the Electorial list "irregularity"

    For those who don't know who Marilyn is - she came in second place in the recent Alliance Alberta leadership race, behind Paul Hinman.

    I know she doesn't like tooting her own horn, so I will, if anyone will clean up Alberta, she will.

    More on her at: www.maburns.com

    cheers
    tom

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 1:38 AM

    Maybe this is off topic, but can organizations such as Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and Equiterre make statements FOR or AGAINST a certain party because of that party's position on the environment? I can see that happening, but not during an election. Does it not constitute 3rd party advertising, which would be in breach of the Elections Act?

    Posted by: Gabby in QC at January 21, 2006 1:46 AM

    Right, now that I've gotten the statutory preamble out of the way, I should mention to Richard that it doesn't matter if they're sleeping on the job, clause 8(4) explicitly excludes places of employment.

    Moving on, it's time to dig out the history books and look at whether or not there is precedent for this sort of behaviour. Well, on 2004-05-29, in the Toronto Sun, Greg Weston wrote the following:

    --------
    "Just when it seemed federal politics couldn't get any sleazier, Sun Media has learned that a group of powerful Tory and Liberal backroom operatives secretly conspired to bolster the Grit national campaign and skew the results in a number of ridings in the last federal election. Two weeks before Jean Chretien called the country to the polls in October 2000, reliable sources say, a small group of top Tory officials cut a secret deal to help Chretien's ultimately successful national campaign for a third majority government.

    "In return, the Liberals agreed to throw the vote in the Calgary Centre riding of then Tory leader Joe Clark. In what may have been a series of similar deals, sources say the Tories also agreed to "stand down" to help Liberal Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan hang on to her Edmonton seat, which she won by only 733 votes.

    "[...] the Tories acclaimed Rory Koopermans to run, a then 25-year-old political neophyte with almost no money or organization. Koopermans says he knew nothing of any backroom deal, and that "If that happened," Koopermans said of the deal, "that's just terrible. It's wrong."

    [...] "The senior officials involved in the deal deliberately told neither Clark nor McLellan anything about it, ensuring the politicians could not be blamed if the story leaked into the media."
    --------

    I see no evidence that the Conservative Party of Canada is currently engaging in the sort of shenanigans the Progressive Conservatives were at that time, if, that is, Mr. Weston's story is true, but are the Liberals still trying to?

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 1:50 AM

    Last election, I was in Ed for a Board meeting.
    I don't live in Ed. A member of our board approached us with a method of raising funds. We could sponsor an AD, to run in an Ed paper, supporting Anne. There was going to be a full page ad of supporters, to run the Sunday before the election. Several VIP types were involved. The AD would be sponsored by supporters of Anne. We had to pay our share, but we would get back a donation double the cost. I objected to this, and we did not take part. Sure enough the full page ad run, with the disclaimer that it was paid for by Edmontonians for Anne Mc. So my question is, how many of those several high profile supporters got their money back plus some. I have often wondered if ADSCAM money was involved, and what ad firm did it. The ridings I will be watching are the ones where incumbents are not running. Are they a party riding or the former incumbents seat. I hear that Kilgour could have won running for the Rhino party. How many cdns still believe that we are PEACEKEEPING in Afganistan. Scrutineers will have their hands full on Monday and blackberrys will be busy sending info from one riding to the other with names of who has voted. I am sure Laurie has already highlighted suspected names. Wait for the recount.

    Posted by: mary at January 21, 2006 1:53 AM

    I have moved out since I last filed my taxes, so I have a driver's license that says I reside in my new riding. But visiting the family at the old rez recently I found my voter registration card in the mail. I could vote twice no problem - use the voter reg card in one riding and the license in the other. If I had kept an old healthcare card from another province I had from two years back I could have used that to vote in a third riding! All this just from having different historical residences. This latest stunt is having two current residences at the same time: getting a voter reg card at the downtown office as well as at home. Those voter reg cards are a dime a dozen. You could grab half a dozen of em hanging around the mailboxes at my apt complex; - people move out, voter reg card comes, new resident just tosses it on the ground. Go grab a mittful, vote as a bunch of different people, no problem.

    Whatever the case, this would explain how Hawn had a big polling lead going into the 04 vote and somehow still managed to lose.

    Posted by: Brian Dell at January 21, 2006 1:56 AM

    I have heard through friends that many Liberals have falsely registered in Anne McLellan's riding. There are single family residences that dozens of Liberals voters use as their voting address.

    I emailed Laurie Hawn's campaign to alert them of this.

    Posted by: Toronto Tory at January 21, 2006 2:04 AM

    That's it.

    I want a pre-election re-election.

    That's right, I'm calling for a re-pre-election.

    Posted by: Hope-in-a-song at January 21, 2006 2:16 AM

    The last time we actually had a door-to-door enumeration for a federal election was in 1997. Since then the National Register of Electors is updated from income tax files and other sources. Who knows how many errors have crept into the National Register in the meantime.

    Anyone else remember that flap a few years ago about how the Liberals were cross referencing government databases? Since that time I have always left empty the box on the income tax form that allows the government to update the Register from my tax record. I would urge everybody reading this to do the same. Let's force these buggers to do proper door-to-door enumerations again.

    Posted by: TimR at January 21, 2006 2:27 AM

    Yes, well, I got a voter registration card, and I lost it. Anyway, I went to an advance poll with my passport, birth certificate, and drivers license, told them I lost the card, and swore (and signed) an oath. Then they found my name as sworn on the oath, on the electors list, voided the oath, crossed off my name on the list, and gave me a ballot. While one may ask why didn't they just check the list first, perhaps oathing first is not such a bad thing.

    Meanwhile, I voted, once, in my place of ordinary residence. To do otherwise is a violation of the act, for anyone who participates is such behaviour. The act allows for scatterbrains like me. It does not allow fraud artists.

    Canada is a functioning democrary, pace the tinfoil hatters, and fraud is not widespread among our citizens, even though I know there's some fraud, everywhere, even in elections. But I don't think that very many electoral volunteers are fradulant.

    And in particular I don't think that the permanent civil service, which is in charge of elections procedures, is in favour of electoral fraud. They would much rather change governing parties, which wipes the slate clean for them, then be found to be participating in electoral fraud, which would forever tarnish their image.

    So to sum up, it is incumbent on us perennially vigelent citizenery to keep an eye out for this sort of misbehaviour, and if and when we find it is our duty to report it as appropriate.

    This is not about peering through your curtains into your neighbour's bedroom, for heaven's sake, this is our Canada's electoral system we're talking about.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 2:27 AM

    Remember what happened to Grant Devines Tories in Saskatchewan after Roy got in? This is nothing compared to what is going to happen to the Liberals. They will cease to be a party once all the truths come out.

    Posted by: mcdonald at January 21, 2006 2:31 AM

    EBD; I assume you saw this: Posted by Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 01:22 AM re: Federal Election act - Proof/I.D.

    My experience as a d.r.o. in municipal elections (same level as Calgary's Ward 10) is that we do not require i.d. because it would be a: too costly; b: why would you want to? and c:When you sign the voter's registry it is an OATH. I brought up the following concerns to the County: No-one has lied under oath? Some would want to, as evidenced in Calgary. What is more costly an enumeration, or a public inquiry?

    EBD; just a word of caution, I'm not a lawyer, but you may want to be careful re: the Strathcona Liberal you mentioned. Just in case! The harder they fall, the harder they come after you.

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 2:43 AM

    When you say "the truths", McDonald, you remind me of the Auditor General's report on the gun registry that is due in two or three months. Oy, the rumours I've heard.

    It is interesting that Ms. McLellan was the minister responsible for that file when the budget went from 2 million to 250 million dollars (later to balloon to 2,000 million dollars), but it's just rumours for now, so what do I know?

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 2:46 AM

    One difference, Vitruvius, between what you're describing with Joe Clark's Tories and Chretien's Liberals is that not running particularly hard against another party leader as a quid pro quo is long established politics and not a crime.

    The voter can still decide where they're going to vote, party campaign efforts notwithstanding.

    This time it's alleged election crime trying to thwart the will of the voter, not the plans of parties.

    It's corrupt, dirty, and criminal.

    Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 21, 2006 2:48 AM

    I moved since the last election, so did not get my "voter's card." When I voted at the electoral office, they filled in a form, took my DL # & my credit card statement as proof of my new address, and waited. 20-25 minutes. The officer who then made me point out where I lived etc & sign 3 places (for once in my life, I didn't read the fine print, I thought I was safe) & filled out my ballot & voted.

    The officer made me point out my address on a map because he'd been flown in from Ottawa. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because we did converse outside the specifics and he was, I believe, sincere. I make a living "reading" people quickly so I think he'd be as pissed off about this as anyone else.

    But I'll wander past my old residence this weekend & grab my mail. Hopefully my voter's card is there. If not, I'll call Elections Canada & Laurie Hawn & give them the heads up.

    I would LOVE to see McLellan have to repay her salary for the past 17 months. Because we DID have a "PC" candidate last election - between him & the spoiled ballots, Laurie would have needed another 30-40 votes to win.

    Evil.

    Posted by: Candace at January 21, 2006 2:51 AM

    A first-time contributor here.

    The Elections Canada person that I've heard on the radio here in Calgary, (a former CBC person), says that the voter information cards are -not- a license to vote card and that people shouldn't be surprised if they're asked to provide proof of who they are when they go to vote.

    The scrutineers should make sure everyone is asked to provide proof of who they are, presumably their drivers license which would allow a check of their address as well.

    Btw, I was surveyed Thursday night, based on the questions, a survey paid for by the Liberals. I spent alot of time replying, "Strongly Disagree"

    As a conclusion, the Liberal campaign of "All Lies, All The Time!" has been quite vile. Paul Martin edges out Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien as Canada's worst Prime Minister ever.

    regards from Calgary...

    Posted by: Robert at January 21, 2006 2:53 AM

    I appreciate, Cheri, that some people do lie under oath, I guess I'm just sayin' that very many don't, and the system mostly works.

    Only because, though, we the electorate hammer on them - the system - when it doesn't work. If anybody has information on voter registration malfeaseance, in Edmonton Center or elsewhere, for or against any party, it is your duty to inform the Chief Electoral Officer.

    It may be that strengthening the identification sub-system was what Mr. Hawn was referring to per EBD's 12:53 AM post. I don't think I'd be against that, after all, I'm not interested in being fradulent.

    (For the record here, I'm talking about identification to vote. The day the state mandates that I carry state identification to walk the streets where I live, that's the day I join the armed insurrection.)

    Keep you powder dry, now, y'hear.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 3:08 AM

    Cheri, I'm not a lawyer either, but I doubt that merely repeating the contents of a newspaper article -- in this case the Edmonton Journal (address listed above at 11:42) -- is libelous, or we'd all be guilty. Besides, I didn't accuse him of anything illegal, or say that he had anything to do with the election list irregularites, just that as a candidate it was negligent for him to not correct the problem more promptly. I stand by that opinion. Thanks for the warning anyway.

    Vitruvius, I agree with Chris. Apples and oranges, basically. Here, we are talking about the possibility that, in a very close riding, hundreds of names from non-existent addresses are on a voters list, and that people who live outside the riding are on the list. I have heard accounts on other sites -- unverified, of course -- that people have received several voter cards, one listing the voter's gender as male, another as female, and so on.

    Now, in the case of this last example, if we suppose for a second that this was part of some kind of voting scam, that would mean that there would be a number of seemingly legitimate names extant with which to cast an illegal vote.

    I can't really understand why in light of these purported serious irregularities under discussion here you would try to draw some sort of equivalence between them, and the Conservatives running a weak candidate in Edmonton in 2000. Oh well.

    Posted by: EBD at January 21, 2006 3:24 AM

    http://www.cmaq.net/en/node.php?id=8864


    MR.DANIEL TOWSEY
    CANADA
    Remedy for Our Stolen Democracy (Revised June 30,2002)
    Dear Citizens:
    Please read this.
    We in Canada have a very serious problem with corruption in our voting process .It has been going on since approximately 1969.
    We have a very old voting system that is extremely flawed. First, it has to be understood how a voting station works. Our polling stations are manned by volunteer witnesses from the different represented parties, all activities, and ballot counting is witnessed by them. When the polling station closes, the witnesses manually count all ballots for each riding. Then the results are reported by telephone to the Solicitor Generals office in Ottawa. At which time the solicitor general can enter any vote results he or she feels like entering, as there are no witnesses present for this process. In Canada, there is no way to verify those results. As all ballots are blank. The ballots are useless once the witnesses leave the polling stations. There is no way to verify the accuracy of the information that the solicitor enters in the computer bank. We have no safe guards against the corruption of our vote results. Most corruption will occur in highly populated areas. Since these activities will likely not be noticed.
    It is to be understood that if even the smallest possibility for vote corruption exists. Then all possible safe guards should be put in place for the witnesses, to eliminate it.

    Posted by: Pd at January 21, 2006 3:30 AM

    I understand, Chris, that there are quid-pro-quos regarding party respect for each other's leaders ridings. Nevertheless, I voted for Ms. McLellan in 2000, because I thought the Reform candidate was unacceptable and the Progressive Conservative candidate was weak. If Mr. Weston's story is correct, then if the Liberals had not made a deal with the Progressive Conservatives to have them not put up a strong candidate, then I would have voted for the Progressive Conservative candidate, not for Ms. McLellan.

    You may wish to simply call me a disgruntled voter, but if Mr. Weston's story is correct, then in my opinion Ms. McLellan's party, the Liberals, stole my vote in 2000.

    Now, EBD, hopefully you can see that it is clear that I am not trying to draw some equivalence between the purported 2000 Edmonton Center and Calgary Center fiasco, and the purported serious irregularities under discussion here, rather, as I mentioned in regard to opening the history books, I was simply pointing out there there is, indeed, purported historic evidence for this sort of election jigging behaviour on behalf of the Liberals and the old Progressive Conservatives in Edmonton Center and Calgary Center, whereas there is in *particular* no such evidence of any such behaviour by the Conservative Party of Canada, ever, or its candidate in Edmonton Center in 2006, Mr. Laurie Hawn.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 3:46 AM

    EBD: don't get me wrong I agree with you but lesser men (Liberals like Alcock) have sued for less. The Liberals have been threatening to sue anything that walks or talks anti-Liberal.

    Vitruvius: relax; I just mentioned you as a reference to quickly look up your post. At one time Federal, Prov. & Municipal elections were all completely different. It seems like nowadays anything goes. I just heard tonight that all you have to do if you don't have a perm. res. is have someone vouch for you.

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 3:49 AM

    I'm quite relaxed, thanks, Cheri, I'm just pointing out the difference between the system (vigilant citizens and oaths and volunteers tend to work out ok as a system, at least in Canada, at least so far, mostly) and the failure modes (election fraud artists and other fraud artists).

    Remember that it's almost always a mistake to thow out the system to mitigate a failure mode, unless the failure modes (plural) are overwhelming. (That's one of things it means to be a conservative.)

    In my opinion, voting for the Conservatives in 2006 is not a matter of throwing out the system, it is a matter of mitigating the system's recent failure modes, which have occurred under Liberal ministerial responsibility, with Ms. McLellan in the deputy Prime Minister role.

    My apologies for those cases where my rhetoric hasn't been clear.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 4:19 AM

    Thanks again Sheri, I know what you mean -- and much greater men have sued for nothing. But again, and this is for the (apparently necessary) record as much as in response to your post, if you look at my post you'll see that I neither said nor implied that he took action to register himself to vote in Edmonton Centre. Mr. H. is not responsible for nor involved with those who are entrusted with the process of registering voters. In other words, the registration irregularities across the board are due to a faulty system.

    That being said, I still believe that as a candidate he should have been more prompt in correcting Election Canada's error. You can't sue that out of me. Call me old fashioned, or call me a lawyer, or both, but his non-reaction LOOKS bad.

    Posted by: EBD at January 21, 2006 4:27 AM

    I agree with you EBD on the matter of Mr. H's behaviour regarding his reporting of his registration anomoly, per the Journal's report, expecially considering that he is a registered candidate and that he had apparently been considering said anomoly for two weeks without reporting it.

    Nevertheless, I do not think that what has been discussed in this thread qualifies as a faulty Canadian system across the board. Are banks sometimes robbed? Yes. Is our banking system faulty? No.

    Either way, on January 23, 2006, vote for Canada, not for the robbers, the stealers, the thiefs, and the fraud artists.

    Posted by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 5:03 AM

    This is funny.

    So I leave a post on Jason Cherniak's blog on how I believe Paul Martin was a bad (Canada's worst) Prime Minister because he is SELFISH and put his own interests before himself and that of his party.

    Then I find a Toronto Star article that says the same thing an hour later:

    "Voters accept that politicians will say almost anything to get elected. But prime ministers are diminished when they make national interests subservient to partisan advantage. That's now a recognizable Martin trait. Just as he sacrificed the party to capture its leadership, Martin twice made the country's priorities second to his own at critical times."

    Then I leave another post on Gerry's blog about everyone and his dog knowing what the worst part of the Martin campaign was except that there are so many different opinions on this you can't keep them straight and a couple hours later, find another Toronto Star article today that opens like this:

    "Everyone knows the moment when it went so wrong for Paul Martin. It's just that every moment is different."

    This is just too funny. The Toronto Star is a right-wing rag, I tell you.

    Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 21, 2006 5:14 AM

    lol - Doh! Okay it isn't two different ones (it's late; I'm tired; it's all Jean Chretien's people's fault) the same beautiful article, 'Martin damaged beyond repair' by James Travers of the Toronto Star.

    Night everyone. Have a great weekend and election!

    Posted by: Chris from Victoria, BC at January 21, 2006 5:21 AM

    Now I understand what Paul Martin means by "progressive" votors. The hidden agenda has been functioning for quite some time.

    Posted by: john at January 21, 2006 5:58 AM

    Macdonald is right. I think the Liberals are terrified that they are going to suffer a fate
    far worse than Grant Devine's Tories in Saskatchewan, should the truth come out.

    Meanwhile, Ann McLellan's winning margins are as follows:

    1993 12
    1997 1,410
    2000 733
    2004 721

    This time I suspect she will live up to her nickname, but not in the way she would like.

    Posted by: Chris at January 21, 2006 7:11 AM

    I received 2 registration cards in the building where I reside. One is for a man that died in 2002. I took the card to the polling station in 2004 and asked them to correct their list but obviously they did not. This time I put an "X" through it and put it in the mail box. They actually phoned me from the Elections Office and I believe it is corrected now. How many other cases of this type of error might there be?

    Posted by: bks at January 21, 2006 7:18 AM

    Elections Canada is a joke. What do you expect from an organization which doesn't even have a better system in place to ensure that a person appearing on the voter's list is in fact a citizen of Canada.

    Posted by: JM at January 21, 2006 8:09 AM

    Anyone that would knowingly commit voter fraud would take as many oaths as required without feeling guilt. This should be a matter for the RCMP. I will give them a chance to respond before I totally lose it. Do not think anyone would actually go to jail for voter fraud when you can commit armed robbery and get 30 days. I am thinking a stern "don't do it again, OK" is in order. I am now concerned, however, with all those Liberal strongholds across the country being in major cities -- how much more of this is going on? There better be a lot more scrutinizing going on during this election. I am going to be asking questions on Monday at my riding for sure.
    The one post that is really haunting me is by Dave, who says "it is not how you vote, it is who counts the votes". Here. In Canada. Foreigners scrutinizing our elections. How could anyone chose that Canada?

    Posted by: morison at January 21, 2006 8:28 AM

    So let's get Stephen to make election/voting fraud a criminal offence when he takes over and gets tough on criminals.

    Then these latte loving birkenstock lawyers who are laughing about voting many times might think twiuce after a few of their friends get caught, do some time and are disbared by the Law Society/

    Posted by: Fred at January 21, 2006 8:58 AM

    "...So let's get Stephen to make election/voting fraud a criminal offence when he takes over..."

    Depending on the extent of this problem he may never get a chance to take over.

    Posted by: JM at January 21, 2006 9:06 AM

    I've been up since 6:00 am, and haven't heard a breath about this on CTV Newsnet or the KBC Newsworld ! What gives ? If this wasn't Canada, Jimmy C and all his U.N. friends would be here to observe the voting, especially if it was dicovered that the ruling party was money laundering taxpayer money into their own party coffers to win elections, and by admitting so much, by claiming that they have payed the citizens back! Along with the new revolations about voter fraud should be "international news" !!!

    Posted by: Carl at January 21, 2006 9:07 AM

    It is time for we small people to take action - Everything we take for granted in this country, voting, MSM news coverage etc. etc. to be fair and balanced has been turned up side down - then I read in Charles Adler's colum the s**t that Toronto is being fed and that it is working - so my challenge is for everyone who wants to Stand up for Canada to e-mail links for some of this crap to friends and family in Toronto - Maybe I have been breathing the fresh air out here in small town Alberta too long but maybe, just maybe something will sink in.

    We can make a difference

    Posted by: Alberta Girl at January 21, 2006 9:40 AM

    She didn't know how the problems arose or whether similar concerns have come up elsewhere during the election.
    EC is on top of this if they have it pointed out to them? Is this what the EC official meant when she stated this to the EJ?
    I had a friend who got 4 voter cards in the '97 election. I phoned EC and was told that everyone knows that you can only vote once! Then why did this woman get 4 cards, all in her own name, to vote at 4 different polls? And we are supposed to believe that EC is on top of this? Interestingly this was also in Alberta--is there a concerted effort by EC and the LIbs to make sure there are fixed Liberal wins there? Is that what Martin meant by his statement that he will end Western Alienation? Guess be getting rid of democracy in Canada he feels he will have to rig Alberta elections then he can say that Albertans voted Liberal and are therefor no longer alienated?

    Posted by: George at January 21, 2006 9:43 AM

    Travers and the Toronto Star still apologists for the Liberals, Kinsella commented on it a couple of days ago on his blog. Jake

    Posted by: Jake at January 21, 2006 10:19 AM

    Well, trouble shooters from Ottawa. OK, I feel better.

    Posted by: morison at January 21, 2006 10:19 AM

    Well you have to know that Elections Canada is an official arm of the committee to re-elect the Liberals when they knew for at least 6 months that 18 ridings in Quebec got illegal money in the Adscam project and they never did anything to ban the Liberals from those ridings. I emailed Elections Canada in Nov and asked why they haven't barred the Liberals from those ridings. Their answer was that nobody laid a complaint. This guy, Kingsley, gets $200,000/year to run elections and he has to wait for a poor little dirt farmer 2000 miles away to lay a complaint before he acts. What bullspit that is. Fire the whole lot of them.

    Posted by: rockyt at January 21, 2006 10:29 AM

    Landslide Annie's technique exposed at last....now...who's going to jail? ;-)

    Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at January 21, 2006 10:45 AM

    Well, we have an extra dude registered at our house. Some fellow by the name of Trent McDonald. It's odd, because his last name is similar to mine.

    Elections Canada was notified after the card came. I was labouring under the impression that this was a case of a screw up. With the revelation of the Edmonchuk fraud, I'm not so sure.

    This riding was insanely close last time.

    Posted by: Krydor at January 21, 2006 11:33 AM

    This Monday's poll has the highest potential for election fraud in Canadain history.

    Posted by: Bruce Randall at January 21, 2006 11:39 AM

    Canaian, eh.

    Posted by: Bruce Randall at January 21, 2006 11:40 AM

    Canadian, doh!

    Posted by: Bruce Randall at January 21, 2006 11:41 AM

    I went seaching for this in the MSM and came up with this http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Election/2006/01/21/1404556-sun.html but thats about it. wonder why it hasn't been picked up?

    Posted by: Dawn at January 21, 2006 11:42 AM

    Can I add my two cents about Marilyn Burns.

    You probably couldn't find a better advocate for electoral change and accountability. I hope Paul is considering her for a position in his shadow cabinet ... she certainly deserves it.

    Posted by: Aizlynne at January 21, 2006 11:49 AM

    WL: Nobody's going to jail, unfortunately, this is Canada. I'm sure the perpetrators have seen the error of their ways and will never never never stray from the path of righteousness again. Besides, if convicted, they'd probably be sentenced to community service, like maybe, voter registration or something.

    Posted by: dmorris at January 21, 2006 11:59 AM

    Fraudulent registration by electors (what Americans call "voter registration fraud") may be more common than I had realized.

    Under the guise of "protecting an elector's right to vote" and "not cherry-picking rights", you may have an "Alice in Wonderland" system where an individual elector's solemn sworn statement of eligibility to vote cannot be challenged at any time.

    Unless, of course, that individual is known to be a "scary" Conservative. In that case, they should receive around-the-clock surveillance by the RCMP and nasty middle-of-the-night anonymous phone calls demanding they "get off their asscott down to the U.S.A.".

    Posted by: SpaceNeedleBoy at January 21, 2006 12:08 PM

    What's that low rumbling sound? Oh, it's just the Conservative landslide...

    Posted by: Knight of Good Mr. Iron Man at January 21, 2006 12:35 PM

    Thanks Dawn for the link to Edmonton Sun:
    "But Alex Swann, who manages McLellan's campaign, said all candidates were called to an Elections Canada meeting Jan. 4 to discuss irregularities in the list that have been deemed "mistakes."
    -snipped-
    "There's a difference between irregularities caused by a computer-generated electors list and deliberate fraud, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence of fraud."

    ----------------------
    I see no evil, hear no evil, think no evil.

    Right. Dang computers did it again.

    How do these guys go to sleep at night? How do their wives/husbands live with them. Worse yet, how do they face their kids knowingly screwing their futures and the integrity of the country?

    cheers
    tom

    PS- the Edmonton Sun shot of Harper I believe is a Liberal plant...(taken of him sideways showing his gut)


    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 12:35 PM

    My wife is an RO here in B.C. At the training session for poll workers she was told that you can't ask foridentification. So if someone comes to vote and says my name is Fred X and I live at 123 4th st. in Surrey they get to vote whether they are that person or not.

    Interesting?
    Horny Toad

    Posted by: Horny Toad at January 21, 2006 1:09 PM

    typical behaviour in Redmonton.

    unfortunately a lot of the dirty tricks were pioneered in Calgary by the tory Aftergood crowd in the last civic election. they did everything but back a dumptruck of fake ballots into the box.

    Posted by: cal2 at January 21, 2006 1:35 PM

    There is no way to verify the accuracy of the information that the solicitor enters in the computer bank. We have no safe guards against the corruption of our vote results.

    I was under the impression there are records kept of the names of persons who actually voted.

    Is that not true?

    Posted by: ol hoss at January 21, 2006 1:44 PM

    You have the right to choose your government

    In your cities

    With ballots

    In Canada

    We are not making this up!

    Posted by: Hans Rupprecht at January 21, 2006 1:50 PM

    I also read somewhere where after the voting at the various polling stations, volunteers from the various parties count and give the final number to someone who "phones" the Election Canada office, or AG office (whatever).

    Then the person on the other end enters the number one would guess into a computer.

    Barring the fact the small polling stations can see the results on CTV/CBC or whoever, what guarentee do we have the numbers are factual?

    With Ward 10 type ballot dumping, if it was done in a more "intelligent" manner - not all 1000 of them bundled together and dropped off in the middle of night - it would be funny if it wasn't so serious - but say over the spread of the weekend, voting day and/or slipped into the count pile by people of less morals, there would be no way to authenticate the numbers.

    Just the fact they phone it in scares me, ever hear a Newf say tuhurteen eh by?

    cheers
    tom

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 1:54 PM

    I am confident that tens, probably hundreds, of thousands of permanent resident immigrants who are not citizens receive voter's cards. When one votes one is not asked for proof of citizenship (conceivably one might be asked for identification, but many things--such as a driver's licence--that do not prove citizenship are accepted).

    I am sure that a reason proof of citizenship is not asked for is that doing so could be called "racist".

    I suspect that as a result of this situation the Liberal Party receives a large number of illegal votes. The new Conservative government should review immediately Elections Canada procedures that result in the sending of voter's cards to non-citizens, and the lack of procedures at polling stations for confirming Canadian citizenship.

    Mark
    Ottawa

    Posted by: Mark Collins at January 21, 2006 2:25 PM

    Yes, the numbers are phoned in, but the official list of electors is sent to Elections Canada, and each candidate gets a copy of all info. That is why, several days after an election an offical result is issued by E.C. For years I have encouraged the kids of my clients to use their parents address as mailing address, when moving from job to job or going to school etc. That way, all T4's and bank stmts etc. get to the same place. They also use parents address on tax returns, until a permanent job, or marriage gives them their own permanent address. People do move during an govt term. This election list should be updated every year. If we get a majority on Mon. they will have 4 yrs to try and get it right. Pray that Toronto voters wake up from their hypnotic trace on Monday.

    Posted by: mary at January 21, 2006 2:46 PM

    "...Fire the whole lot of them..."

    Wouldn't help. They'll get rehired as Consultants.

    Posted by: JM at January 21, 2006 2:53 PM

    I am a scrutineer this coming monday (Edmonton-Strathcona). What we were told is that the DRO cannot ask for ID, if the person brings a regristration card, however a scrutineer can for any reason. On the other hand, you cannot systematically challenge everybody, or the DRO can throw you out. If the scrutineers for Edmonton-Central were given a list of names to check for, they could keep an eye out for those names and challenge those people, otherwise we are just shooting in the dark.

    Finally all ballots are counted in the presence of partisan scrutineers by hand, each of whom makes a tally. The final results of the DRO is then compared to the final results of each scrutineer and if they don't match a recount is held until all the lists match.

    Posted by: Joe Canadian at January 21, 2006 3:52 PM

    Horny Toad; That is interesting. I hope they are saying you can't ask EVERYONE, rather than ANYONE. If we refer to the posting of the election acts provided by: Vitruvius at January 21, 2006 01:22 AM. can we assume they are being sloppy? Or not understanding their duties?

    I can tell you regarding the municipal elections I have taken part in, everyone was very professional, knew the regs, backwards and forwards and they were followed to the letter. There was the odd slip-up, but they were duly noted and it is learned from. But there is a lot more at stake here isn't there? A little cheating here and there amongst friends. Overlook the little stuff until it becomes a pig stye?

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 4:07 PM

    You know the more I think about the Liberals and Edmonton Centre, the more I wonder about other ridings with a strong, uh, ethnic core.

    While risking sounding like a bigot, I think of various Vancouver and Toronto suburbs...if one doesn't get challenged about who they are at the polling booth, well what's stopping large block of "families" from double and triple dipping? Heck a whole, uh, pointy round church?

    Reading a post on here or over at Angry's about someone's wife told not to bother to ask for identification kinda irked me.

    Here's a stickler...what about landed immigrants that haven't attained citizenship? Can't ask them for their C-card because, well, that is racial and bigoted right?

    A drivers licence, Canadian does not make.

    cheers
    tom

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 4:41 PM

    Cheri, no doubt there are a lot of good people volunteering at the voting stations, but it is the leadership or afterwards I'm worried about.

    Take for example (to beat to death again) the Ward 10 elections. Approx 1000 ballots were dumped overnight at one station and it was caught. Now if these dorks were smart, they'd slip them in a few dozen at a time. But the point they dumped them all at once, tells me either they are stund bunnies, or they knew someone on the inside who'd take them.

    Then we had an "investigation" where the mayor kyboshed it, even to the judges anger, and then we, the taxpayers of Calgary had to pay I think 60% of M.Aftergood's lawyer fees (the dorkette).

    Tell me where in the free world does the tax payer pay for both sides of a court case, even when one was found guilty with their hands in the cookie jar?

    So like I said, to dump 1000+ ballots overnight at a voting station shows utter stupidity or inside contacts.

    The smoking gun theory I guess.

    cheers
    tom

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 4:51 PM

    Another point is that, giving falling participation rates in elections, Elections Canada has every incentive to allow as many votes to be cast as possible, to show what a good job it is doing.

    Mark
    Ottawa

    Posted by: Mark Collins at January 21, 2006 5:23 PM

    I think we might need to institute a voter ID card (or we could use Passports) - no valid ID, no ballot to vote, simple. If it was electronic, like a bank card, we could ensure that everyone only voted once, at least, simply by having it query a database (not one with all the numbers listed, but one where it recorded you as voting). Anyone who objecs to having to show ID inorder to vote wants fraud to happen, it's that simple.

    Go Hawn Go.

    Posted by: MSYB at January 21, 2006 6:18 PM

    I know, let's set up a Voter Decide registry!

    Take some of the Gun registry money and put it towards the VD registry.

    Oh, we already got something like that eh...


    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 6:28 PM

    LMAO. This sucks, I was really looking forward to giving Annie the boot. Oh well, atleast this time she won't be in power. FYI we are having the University of Alberta's model parliament on the 27th at the Alberta Legislative Assembly.

    Info at http://www.ualberta.ca/~modelpc/schedule.html

    Come check us out!!

    Posted by: bryce at January 21, 2006 6:37 PM

    A couple things stand out to me about you post Tomax; I know you are speaking rhetorically and so am I. First about the dumbness of dumping a 1000 ballots at once in Calgary. It probably is dumb but is it arrogance too? Liberal arrogance? Inside job is a definite angle too, which says that they KNOW the system is open to play with. And who were the players in that group? David Aftergood was involved with which party?

    Re: Tax Payers pay BOTH sides. We do it all the time. Not only did Gomery and Chretien et al do it to us, we also paid for the whole ad-scam scam etc. Then there's legal aid. Great country eh?

    BTW - I voted for M.B. and Rona who are both great Woman and a credit to their parties. We do need more like them in Government. I look forward to seeing them in action.

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 6:41 PM

    Years ago when I was merely a temporary worker in Canada, I was sent a voter's card. I called Elections Canada and told them I was inelligible to vote, and surprised that they didn't have a system in place to cross reference it.

    You should have to show your passport, or picture ID with your birth certificate, or citizenship card to vote. I'm white and a native English speaker, so asking me if I'm a citizen should not be considered racist. As long as everyone has to show proof, there'd be no basis for a racism charge. I'm sure we'd still hear one though.

    Posted by: Kyla at January 21, 2006 7:35 PM

    "David Aftergood was involved with which party?"

    The CLAP. Closet Liberal Alberta Party...err PC's

    Posted by: tomax at January 21, 2006 7:41 PM

    I just saw a commercial on TV in Jean-Pierre Kingsley, head of Elections Canada, advised persons who have not received a voter information card on how they can vote. He said they should simply go to their poll with documents showing their "name, address and signature" (a direct quote).

    No mention of proof of citizenship--which, as we know, will not be asked for.

    It seem to me that M. Kingsley is de facto encouraging illegal voting by non-citizens.

    Mark
    Ottawa

    Posted by: Mark Collins at January 21, 2006 8:59 PM

    Please contact Elections Canada! go to Canada.com and post comments on the forums sections, contact the Conservative party of Canada, contact newspapers!! we need to spread the word!! Those lieberal cheaters are showing their corruption again!!!

    Posted by: John D at January 21, 2006 10:05 PM

    Mark C. _ good point on votes. The other angle is, Parties now derrive their funding per vote... The more votes they scare up the more they get.

    Posted by: Cheri at January 21, 2006 10:19 PM

    BOY! ANNIE SURE MADE A LOT OF FRIENDS TO VOTE HER INTO POWER FOR THE SHORT TIME BETWEEN COMING FROM HALIFAX AND SAILING OFF TO OTTAWA .

    Posted by: MORT at January 21, 2006 10:49 PM

    It surprises me very little what Liberals will do regardless of how far it goes beyond the law.

    Annie is one definately to be investigated no doubt.

    If it is proven then, that she is indeed been riding on the shirt tails of the Canadian taxpayer during her term(s) as a so called elected official, I wonder if she will still be entitled to her 90 some thousand dollar a year retirement from politics after being defeated in the election.

    After all, if she did indeed sit in parliment with a stacked and illegal majority vote in the last and preceeding elections, perhaps she'd be best off sitting through her retirement in a Canadian prison.

    Posted by: canadahoser at January 21, 2006 11:46 PM

    This is outright fraud by the Lieberal party ~! But what do you expect from a party whose election campaign has been nothing but negative mudslinging and not on their past record ?

    As if ?But now its up to Elections Canada to declare the election null and void in the area where the "irregularities" have been found.

    Correct the frudulent entries and have a revote .

    And then try and imprison the perps///

    Posted by: mred at January 22, 2006 8:27 AM

    "If Paul Martin wants full and free access to abortion..is he willing to allow partial-birth abortions?

    Where does Paul Martin draw the line on abortion?

    Posted by: Ed Tucker

    Liberals are prime examples of why abortions should be made retroactive.

    Posted by: mred at January 22, 2006 8:28 AM

    Man, you guys in Edmonton are a paranoid lot. Problem is, you have me wondering what the hell is going on. I always thought, if nothing else, we didn't have fraud in our electoral system by the DRO's and RO's and people above them. After Adscam, Iam worried there is lots of potential for corruption....

    Lets face it, now that each vote is $1.75, there is more reason for fraud than other. You don't suppose Chretien had all this in mind when they brought this little deal in do ya??


    As for "disenfranchishing" voters, you know the left will pounce on this if there is any attempt at making voting more fraud proof. No one who is a Canadian citizen and out of jail should be ever denied the vote. Just because tho you are breathing and hold a pulse and know a Liberal says to me NO, you shall not vote. Please Mr. Harper, bring some sanity back to this country.

    Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at January 23, 2006 3:29 AM

    It didn't occur to me until now, but I've been getting voter cards for my older brother every election, both provincial and federal, since 2002(He had adopted my address for mailing purposes, which is fine). It seems odd because he moved overseas from 2001-2004.

    Each time a card came, I would take it with me to the polling station and turn it in, advising the person there that he did not live with me, but like clockwork, his card would show up for the next one. He has now lived in Saskatoon since 2004. When the card showed up for this election, I laughingly told our mother that if he calls, let him know he's voting CPC this time around!

    Obviously, I'd never vote for my brother, but I'm wondering if somebody hasn't been trying to do exactly that.

    Posted by: Greg in Surrey at January 23, 2006 9:15 AM

    Ms. "Landslide" is gone now but what I want to know is if this has happened in other cities? This may not be an isolated incident and the city vote might make a difference in the outcome.

    Posted by: Murray B. at January 25, 2006 6:58 PM
    Site
Meter