Etobicoke Centre election result null and void

[Moviefan-2]

I haven't seen anything on the news sites yet, but it's being reported on Twitter that a judge has ruled the Etobicoke Centre result from last year's federal election is null and void.

That was a seat the Tories won by just a handful of votes. The Liberal MP who was the incumbent, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, challenged the result in court, saying there had been voting irregularities.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/27/pol-etobicoke-centre-court-arguments-friday.html

Looks like there will be a by-election. The voting irregularities will likely be a central theme.

 

[groggy]

This one wasn't even based off the robocalls.
That's another 7 ridings taken on by the council of Canadians and still in progress.
Its a start.

 

[canada-man]

the tories are doomed?

 

[Moviefan-2]

Here's the Globe and Mail story:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ion-results-in-toronto-riding/article2437218/

Apparently, it still has to be learned whether the ruling will be appealed, something the story says is likely. If it is appealed, the story says it would be fast-tracked. So, any by-election may be further down the road.

 

[rld]

the tories are doomed?

Did you bother to learn anything about the case?

 

[Anynym]

I haven't had time to read the whole judgement yet, but it is beyond strange that this riding already had a judicial recount (which certified every ballot as valid) and now, a year after the election, the Liberals get it overturned? IIRC there's supposed to be a 30-day limit for filing the initial claim (counting from the "discovery of harm", which would have been when the scrutineers first reported to the campaign that there were irregularities at the poll - i.e. on election day).

The idea that an election result can be overturned just because it was a close race does severe damage to the idea of fair elections in Canada.

Next time, it'll be because a poll was an hour late opening. Or was closed for an hour because of a fire alarm. Or any of a thousand things that go wrong during the course of every single election.

Note: The Canada Elections Act states that "No election shall be declared invalid by reason of ... (d) any insufficiency ... or any mistake in the use of the Forms contained in the Act or prescribed by the Chief Electoral Officer persuant to this Act".

Yet this appears to be exactly what this Judge did.

 

[blackrock13]

I haven't had time to read the whole judgement yet, but it is beyond strange that this riding already had a judicial recount (which certified every ballot as valid) and now, a year after the election, the Liberals get it overturned? IIRC there's supposed to be a 30-day limit for filing the initial claim (counting from the "discovery of harm", which would have been when the scrutineers first reported to the campaign that there were irregularities at the poll - i.e. on election day).

The idea that an election result can be overturned just because it was a close race does severe damage to the idea of fair elections in Canada.

Next time, it'll be because a poll was an hour late opening. Or was closed for an hour because of a fire alarm. Or any of a thousand things that go wrong during the course of every single election.

Note: The Canada Elections Act states that "No election shall be declared invalid by reason of ... (d) any insufficiency ... or any mistake in the use of the Forms contained in the Act or prescribed by the Chief Electoral Officer persuant to this Act".

Yet this appears to be exactly what this Judge did.

You're right, you didn't read the judge and understand the reason for the decision.

 

[fuji]

So Anynym, are you saying that you know the law better than the judge?

 

[Nikki2]

Leslie MacKinnon from CBC had been live tweeting during the trial and has continued to add comments as new information has become available.

https://twitter.com/#!/LeslieMacKinnon

 

[groggy]

Leslie MacKinnon from CBC had been live tweeting during the trial and has continued to add comments as new information has become available.

https://twitter.com/#!/LeslieMacKinnon

The issues that won the case were that there were enough voters with questionable paperwork as to easily cover the difference in the winning 26 votes. It was only about problems with elections canada registering and keeping track of voters, not the robocall issue at all. It could be applied to other ridings, but you'd have to prove there were that many more questionable votes. In this case they talked of about 191 questionable voters and a 26 vote winning difference.

The post is reporting that the robocall investigation by elections canada is preparing their first report. Charges may result, though its unclear, and the investigation is ongoing. I'd expect they charge a couple of people for Guelph and use it as ammunition to go after the federal party more thoroughly.

 

[Doug1ca]

The issues that won the case were that there were enough voters with questionable paperwork as to easily cover the difference in the winning 26 votes. It was only about problems with elections canada registering and keeping track of voters, not the robocall issue at all. It could be applied to other ridings, but you'd have to prove there were that many more questionable votes. In this case they talked of about 191 questionable voters and a 26 vote winning difference.

The post is reporting that the robocall investigation by elections canada is preparing their first report. Charges may result, though its unclear, and the investigation is ongoing. I'd expect they charge a couple of people for Guelph and use it as ammunition to go after the federal party more thoroughly.

All politics aside guys, I can't believe this is happening in Canada. What is Elections Canada doing...do they have control over the voting process or not? To whom are they accountable?

 

[fuji]

All politics aside guys, I can't believe this is happening in Canada. What is Elections Canada doing...do they have control over the voting process or not? To whom are they accountable?

Elections Canada was opposed to the decision. It was a Superior Court judge who ordered the election result nullified. There's no allegation of fraud here, just that the locals in that particular riding allowed too many clerical errors.

 

[someone]

There are always going to be some clerical errors like this. The Globe article said that 52 000 voted in the riding and the judge “found that officials failed to ensure 79 voters were properly registered or cleared to cast a ballot.” In any aspect of life, perfection is rare. I suspect many ridings would have a similar number of irregularities. If the ruling is upheld, I worry that it means that any close result in the future will lead to a bi-election. I suspect that is why Elections Canada argued against a new election.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Not that I would want to revisit the hanging chads issue, but in every election result there is a certain margin of error for clerical mistakes, unclear ballots, etc.

Sometimes, the result is smaller than the range for error.

 

[blackrock13]

There are always going to be some clerical errors like this. The Globe article said that 52 000 voted in the riding and the judge “found that officials failed to ensure 79 voters were properly registered or cleared to cast a ballot.” In any aspect of life, perfection is rare. I suspect many ridings would have a similar number of irregularities. If the ruling is upheld, I worry that it means that any close result in the future will lead to a bi-election. I suspect that is why Elections Canada argued against a new election.

The past head of Election Canada, JP Kingsley, will agree with you, yet he also said it wasn't the numbers, but the type of errors that got his attention, easy ones to catch and deal with, even for volunteers.

 

[Possum Trot]

So Anynym, are you saying that you know the law better than the judge?

You seem to have no trouble disagreeing when it suits you.

As far as a "re-do" goes I think the Liberals might be further embarrassed by doing worse the next time around. They are clearly solidly in 3rd place just about everywhere now.

 

[blackrock13]

You seem to have no trouble disagreeing when it suits you.

As far as a "re-do" goes I think the Liberals might be further embarrassed by doing worse the next time around. They are clearly solidly in 3rd place just about everywhere now.

It could happen that they end up third, but since the NDP ended up a distant third wit only 14% of the vote it would be a mind screwer. The anyone but the Conservative thinking votes would be more easily obtained by voting Liberals, especially if the same popular candidates wins.

 

[Moviefan-2]

The Liberals are strong in Etobicoke Centre.

If the party did somehow finish third, that would pretty much spell the end of the federal Grits. But that would be a pretty astonishing event.

It will be interesting to see who the NDP nominates, and how the party does. In general elections, the NDP isn't a factor in Etobicoke Centre. But a by-election is different, since the party can focus on one riding. I don't think there'll be a Vegas gal running for the NDP in this one.

 

[fuji]

You seem to have no trouble disagreeing when it suits you.

Find just one post where I claimed to know the law better then an Ontario court judge, or any other Canadian or US civilian court judge, else acknowledge that you make up the things that you say.

Certainly I have challenged the legitimacy of gitmo, and certainly there are laws I'm critical of, but I don't believe I have ever disputed a judge's interpretation of the law the way anynym just did.

 

[oldjones]

There are always going to be some clerical errors like this. The Globe article said that 52 000 voted in the riding and the judge “found that officials failed to ensure 79 voters were properly registered or cleared to cast a ballot.” In any aspect of life, perfection is rare. I suspect many ridings would have a similar number of irregularities. If the ruling is upheld, I worry that it means that any close result in the future will lead to a bi-election. I suspect that is why Elections Canada argued against a new election.

In this instance he argument that carried was that the number of errors was so disproportional to the margin, though small in the overall count, that it destroyed confidence in the decision. All those details like the numbered counterfoil that's torn off your ballot, or asking you to say your name and address (the one on the ID you just gave the DRO) or the various oaths voters may have to swear exist to ensure that we will be confident of that result. George Bush's Presidency and was irreversibly affected by the Florida Fiasco, and every American has felt the effects since.

After training and working polls in a number of federal and provincial elections I can assure you the aim and intention is focussed on zero errors. But as you say "perfection is rare" and almost impossible given a temporary staff (over a thousand in my riding) that has to be recruited, trained assigned and monitored all in a few weeks. Considering the riding's Returning Officer is likewise a temporary appointment, and also has to oversee the nomination of candidates the registration of their agents, the registration of thousands of voters, the selection, evaluation and rental of hundreds of accessible polling locations and the mailing of all the various notices to voters, I'd say an error rate of 79 forms in 52,000 voters was indeed understandable.

But it is not good enough, not with a margin of only 26 votes. Which is why there's a recount law, and now a by-election.