The Guelph Mercury reports that the Conservative Party of Canada is seeking to have the “special ballots” of as many as 700 students nullified.
Here is the text of a letter that Arthur Hamilton, the Conservative Party's lawyer, sent to Elections Canada yesterday outlining the party's objections. (Do read the Mercury story first and then parts of this letter will make more sense)
Mr. Pierre Boutet
Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerDear Mr. Boutet:
Re: Polling irregularities in GuelphThank you for speaking with me on numerous occasions yesterday afternoon in respect of voting irregularities in the electoral district of Guelph. Given the circumstances which transpired at the University of Guelph yesterday, I wish to confirm in writing the content of our discussions.
The purpose of my first call to you yesterday was to address what appeared to be a simple matter of the exclusion of a scrutineer at a time when ballots were being provided to individuals purporting to be on the list of electors within the Guelph electoral district. After our various discussions, you expressly confirmed to me that no advance poll or other form of polling had been sanctioned by Elections Canada for any location at the University of Guelph that day, and that accordingly, any ballots which had been received and placed in the ballot box then located at the University of Guelph were a nullity, which would not be recognized, counted or used for any purpose relating to the 41 st general election now underway. Given that express representation by you, acting in your role as authorized by the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada (the “CEO”), many related concerns with respect to the manner by which this polling was being conducted became moot.
You will know that in a subsequent telephone discussion between us yesterday afternoon, further concerns were raised regarding potential polling or supposed “registration of voters” which was being conducted on the campus of York University in North Toronto. In that subsequent telephone discussion, you once again confirmed that no polling at any university campus had been sanctioned by the CEO, and that as such, no person purporting to be on a voter's list should have been provided a ballot under any circumstances on April 13 at any polling station which was not located within the office of a Returning Officer.
Following our discussions, I am advised that the Returning Officer for the electoral district of Guelph, or an individual identifying herself as the Returning Officer personally attended at the University of Guelph to order that the collection of completed ballots from supposed voters continue, and further, that the hours the poll would remain open were extended for a second time that day, such that this supposed poll remained open beyond 7:00 p.m. Indeed, the final ballot was cast and put into a supposed special ballot box at 8:00 p.m. last evening. The ballot box in question was identified as special ballot box #2 and bore the marking 351-700. It is further my understanding that two seals were affixed to this ballot box, the top seal bearing #1030701 and the bottom seal bearing #1030702.
As you know from our discussions, the opportunity of candidates in the electoral district of Guelph to scrutineer during this “voting” did not comply with the requirements of the Canada Elections Act. But for the representation which you made to me during our telephone discussions yesterday, that all of the ballots placed special ballot box #2 (or any other ballot box utilized) were a nullity, the Conservative Party of Canada and its candidate in the electoral district of Guelph would have a number of challenges and complaints with respect to the ballots now collected during this supposed polling event at the University of Guelph yesterday.
However, on the strength of the unequivocal, express representation you provided yesterday, in accordance with the authority provided to you by the CEO, we require immediate confirmation from the CEO and the Returning Officer from the electoral district of Guelph that this ballot box and all of its contents will remain sealed and that none of the ballots contained therein will under any circumstances be combined with, added to or otherwise dealt with when the final tabulation of votes cast for the various candidates in the electoral district of Guelph takes place. We require this confirmation from the Returning Office and the CEO in writing without delay.
On a related note, a scrutineer who attempted to be present with this ballot box as it was located at the University of Guelph yesterday noted that many of the controls required for a polling location were not in place. Specifically, at the time when ballots were being provided to voters and placed in special ballot box #2, partisan election materials from various candidates contesting the election in the electoral district of Guelph were present in the polling location and indeed immediately proximate to the location of the ballot box. We trust the CEO and the Returning Officer for the electoral district of Guelph will agree that such unrestricted polling conditions fall markedly below the standard required by the Canada Elections Act.
To ensure immediate attention to the matters raised in this letter, I have taken the liberty of providing a copy of this letter to Mr. Mayrand, one of his counsel, and the Returning Officer for the electoral district of Guelph.
Once again, thank you for your prompt attention and definitive determination on the impropriety of the events at the University of Guelph with respect to this supposed polling location yesterday afternoon.
Yours very truly,
Arthur Hamilton
Also related: In 2006, the Liberals shut down some special ballot collection at the University of Toronto.
For the record – according to Anne Boudra, the Returning Officer for Guelph, there were approximately 270 votes cast in total – nowhere near 700.
Was this staged for the students or by the students? How would the university sanction this if it was not an official election Canada voting site? Voting is a serious formal citizen responsibility. I made a change on my registration card yesterday at a polling station and was told advance voting started April 22nd, why was this any different?
A detailed story about the 2006 controversy in Trinity-Spadina:
http://www.queensjournal.ca/story/2006-01-20/news/special-polls-pulled-u-t/
It sounds like the LPC called Elections Canada to ask about the special ballot–they said they hadn't been notified about it (the story notes that the Green Party said the same thing). This was before the ballot took place. They also say that it was Elections Canada's decision to cancel the vote.
In this case, the CPC is demanding that Elections Canada nullify the votes, the day after the ballot.
“[Tom Allison, campaign manager for Tony Ianno] said he contacted the Liberal party lawyer, who in turn contacted Elections Canada to find out under what authority the on-campus polls were being conducted. According to Allison, the lawyer was told that Elections Canada in Ottawa knew nothing about the arrangement, and that they called back the next day to say it had been cancelled.
“Allison said it was Elections Canada, not the Liberal party, that had decided to close the polling stations.
“'We didn’t cancel anything, we didn’t make any decision,' he said. 'Elections Canada is completely independent. They run elections, they make decisions.'
“Diane Benson, media liaison for Elections Canada in Ottawa, said the decision made by Elections Canada was not politically motivated.
“'Elections Canada would have acted on this no matter who had notified us,' she said.
“Benson said the reason behind the cancellation of the polling stations is twofold.
“First, because advance voting was taking place in standard polling stations and the returning officer was ensuring that students were being registered and added to the electoral list, Elections Canada deemed there was no need for the additional special ballot initiative that was planned, she said.
“Also, Benson said, there was a risk that parties could canvass in the area where the polling was to be done.
“'Canada’s electoral law is very specific about where the voting can take place,” she said. “The special ballot initiative [on U of T campus] would have taken place in an area where canvassing by candidates could also occur.'”
This doesn't make sense. Elections Canada put out instructions telling their returning officers not to run similar polls. Why? Do they think they would lose a legal challenge?
If this one is legitimate, they all are. If the rest aren't, then this one isn't. What's going on here?
Given the explanations provided by Elections Canada today (on your next post as well as in the letter to the Liberal's legal counsel: http://www.scribd.com/doc/53111621/Elections-Canada), sure doesn't appear that the CPC had a good handle on Canadian election laws before making up all these allegations. Good lesson too in knowing *who* to talk to get the facts – i.e. not just the first guy you get on the phone.
Hmmm, I don't think that the Conservatives are ignorant of the election laws, given that they are promoting special ballots to all Conservative voters on their website. Clearly their only problem with this particular special ballot is that those darned students won't be voting for them.
This is an example of electoral fraud that is seen often in the USA. Democrats / Liberals typically benefit from this because campuses are often left-indoctrinated. They vote on campus using special ballots, then they go home and vote again – seldom does anybody check to see if they've voted already. Good on the Conservatives to demand nullification.