When Andy Wells said people would vote for Saddam Hussein rather than him, he likely wasn't only speaking of the deep-seated animosity some people have for the mayor of the capital city.
They likely would opting for Saddam's democratic election system.
The City of St. John's mail-in ballot system is the best case yet for a new municipal elections act that brings civic elections into line with the standards of a modern democracy.
A committee of councillors plus municipal officials (who owe their paycheques to the councillors) devised a system that violates the spirit and intent of the Municipal Elections Act. Here are some examples of the Act's provisions, designed to counteract corruption (like fraud), that the city officials have repeatedly and consistently ignored:
1. Given that the voters list is out of date, contains inaccuracies and the procedures for administering the election make it possible for the same person to receive two ballots for two separate wards, the election is potentially in violation of s. 23. This section prohibits the same person from voting in two separate wards while being resident in only one.
2. The city has issued ballots to individuals who fail to qualify under s. 24 (residency). Examples have been well documented beyond the 4, 000 officially noted thus far.
3. Candidates have been unable to exercise their right under s. 25 to challenge individual voters and require that they affirm or attest to their qualification as a voter and to have said objection registered under s. 41.
4. There is some question as to whether the city has applied s. 40 requiring a record of those who have cast votes, typically by crossing names from the voting list, to preclude double-voting.
5. There is no indication that s. 38 was applied under which candidates or their agents inspect the ballot box and ensure that it is empty at the time it is sealed.
6. The provisions for declaring ballots spoiled under s. 50 have been misapplied in the case of the 700 disallowed votes. These ballots may well be otherwise valid (i.e. not overvoted etc) but they are precluded merely because city officials refuse to adopt simple methods for removing the voter declaration form from the envelope containing ballots and still preventing anyone (except election officials) from knowing how any one person voted.
Incidentally, this scrupulous adherence to the notion of secrecy is an example of the zealous way officials apply some rules but ignore others. For example, under federal and provincial election rules a voting official may assist a voter (thereby learning how the vote was cast). But they are sworn to secrecy anyway!
7. The city is in clear violation of s. 51, which provides that the ballot boxes may not be opened and counting commence until after the close of polls. There is no legitimate reason for violating this provision. The city clerk's attitude at the candidates briefing (i.e. that the election was effectively over by now anyway) is certainly an indication of the antidemocratic attitude officials have brought to the process of elections.
8. Based on all the foregoing, this mail-vote system violates s. 54(5) insofar as the procedures established by the municipal bylaw are not consistent with the principles established under the MEA.
Beyond these points, there are ample grounds to question the legitimacy of this election. The unwillingness of city officials to accept reasonable alternatives to their rules further demonstrates the substantive problems with this election.
Their goal is to deliver a result as cheaply as possible. Legitimacy and fairness are not an issue.
After this fiasco is completed, the provincial government should introduce a new elections act to bring municipal voting rules in line with provincial ones. Let the province's chief electoral officer run the entire voting process. It would be cheaper than the current system and infinitely more fair to all concerned.
It is certainly far more important and issue than discussing whether or not to change the province's flag.
What good is a flag if the basics of democracy are trampled?
27 September 2005
26 September 2005
Mail-in voting: more details; more evidence of major problems
Candidates and their representatives received a briefing today on how the mail-in ballots will be counted on Tuesday.
Here are some details:
1. Candidates are unable to scrutinize ballots as they would in any other election. Since ballots began arriving at City Hall on 12 September, city officials have already made their decisions about validity of specific ballots and included them or excluded them based on their own policy.
2. To date, about 700 ballot kits have been ruled invalid. These ballot kits either had no voter declaration, had one that wasn't signed, had multiple signatures on the declaration (presumably including a notary's signature attesting to the identity of the voter [!!!]) or some other technical failing.
3. "Spoiled" ballot kits are running at a rate 10 times higher than the provincial election despite a turn-out thus far that is one tenth of the total provincial votes cast. One tenth the votes; 10 times as many "spoils".
Of the approximately 25, 000 mail-in ballots cast thus far, almost 3% have been ruled "spoiled". In the last provincial general election, out of more than 278, 000 ballots cast only 790 were ruled "spoiled". That's .28%, compared to the 2.8% for the city election.
4. The actual number of rejected ballots (each kit actually contains four separate ballots for different races) is actually around 2, 800. The total number of possible ballots (four per voter) is 75,000 times four, or 300,000. Even if we allow this figure as being the number of "ballots" then the spoilage rate thus far is double the last federal election and three times the number of "spoils" in the last provincial election.
5. In the last federal general election, the number of rejected ballots for Newfoundland was 0.5%.
6. The St. John's municipal vote will set a new national record for spoiled ballots, once the actual number of spoiled ballots will be determined on 27 September. All that has been determined right now is the number of kits that have been rejected as invalid. Within each ballot kit that will be counted on 27 September (accepted as valid by officials), individual ballot sections such as the one for mayor may be blank, double-voted, written on or otherwise spoiled using conventional definitions.
7. Ballot counting will begin shortly after 0800 hrs on the 27th, or 12 hours before the polls close. In every other election, ballot boxes are not opened until after the polls have closed. In this election, the election results will be known (except for the handful of ballot kits received on the official counting day) by around noon. Results will not be released until after 2000 hrs (8:00 PM) but city officials appeared to have no firm policy on this point.
8. Candidates have had no opportunity to challenge the credentials of voters, as provided in the Municipal Elections Act. If any candidate detects a problem on polling day, there is no way to determine which fraudulent ballot has been cast or how many such ballots may have been cast. City officials did not consider this to be an issue.
9. City officials have not been crossing names off their voting list, another way of detecting fraudulent voting in cases where ballots have been sent to the same person under two slightly different names.
10. Dominion Voting System Corporation [DVS Corp] has been contracted to count the ballots using their computerized counting system.
Likely problems don't stem from their system; problems come from the completely inadequate procedures established by city officials and approved by city council.
Here are some details:
1. Candidates are unable to scrutinize ballots as they would in any other election. Since ballots began arriving at City Hall on 12 September, city officials have already made their decisions about validity of specific ballots and included them or excluded them based on their own policy.
2. To date, about 700 ballot kits have been ruled invalid. These ballot kits either had no voter declaration, had one that wasn't signed, had multiple signatures on the declaration (presumably including a notary's signature attesting to the identity of the voter [!!!]) or some other technical failing.
3. "Spoiled" ballot kits are running at a rate 10 times higher than the provincial election despite a turn-out thus far that is one tenth of the total provincial votes cast. One tenth the votes; 10 times as many "spoils".
Of the approximately 25, 000 mail-in ballots cast thus far, almost 3% have been ruled "spoiled". In the last provincial general election, out of more than 278, 000 ballots cast only 790 were ruled "spoiled". That's .28%, compared to the 2.8% for the city election.
4. The actual number of rejected ballots (each kit actually contains four separate ballots for different races) is actually around 2, 800. The total number of possible ballots (four per voter) is 75,000 times four, or 300,000. Even if we allow this figure as being the number of "ballots" then the spoilage rate thus far is double the last federal election and three times the number of "spoils" in the last provincial election.
5. In the last federal general election, the number of rejected ballots for Newfoundland was 0.5%.
6. The St. John's municipal vote will set a new national record for spoiled ballots, once the actual number of spoiled ballots will be determined on 27 September. All that has been determined right now is the number of kits that have been rejected as invalid. Within each ballot kit that will be counted on 27 September (accepted as valid by officials), individual ballot sections such as the one for mayor may be blank, double-voted, written on or otherwise spoiled using conventional definitions.
7. Ballot counting will begin shortly after 0800 hrs on the 27th, or 12 hours before the polls close. In every other election, ballot boxes are not opened until after the polls have closed. In this election, the election results will be known (except for the handful of ballot kits received on the official counting day) by around noon. Results will not be released until after 2000 hrs (8:00 PM) but city officials appeared to have no firm policy on this point.
8. Candidates have had no opportunity to challenge the credentials of voters, as provided in the Municipal Elections Act. If any candidate detects a problem on polling day, there is no way to determine which fraudulent ballot has been cast or how many such ballots may have been cast. City officials did not consider this to be an issue.
9. City officials have not been crossing names off their voting list, another way of detecting fraudulent voting in cases where ballots have been sent to the same person under two slightly different names.
10. Dominion Voting System Corporation [DVS Corp] has been contracted to count the ballots using their computerized counting system.
Likely problems don't stem from their system; problems come from the completely inadequate procedures established by city officials and approved by city council.
24 September 2005
And then there's this blog I just found...
which should make the blood pressure over at Liam-land [aka Responsible Government League]break through the sphygmomanometer cuff.
The author of this blog, Watching the CPC spin machine in actionn, is pretty funny.
Consider this post on one of my favourite Connies, Peter MacKay.
Or this one on the Connie bloggers and the disappearing posts. Seems they are trying to find any way to discredit Belinda - now that she isn't a Connie. And at least a couple of the angriest bloggers in the world actually had to pull their conspiracy posts when it turned out the conspiracy was... wait for it...a complete fiction.
So let's just post this one and wait for the little explosion. I'll keep my eyes on the horizon and see if the mushroom cloud erupts.
The author of this blog, Watching the CPC spin machine in actionn, is pretty funny.
Consider this post on one of my favourite Connies, Peter MacKay.
Or this one on the Connie bloggers and the disappearing posts. Seems they are trying to find any way to discredit Belinda - now that she isn't a Connie. And at least a couple of the angriest bloggers in the world actually had to pull their conspiracy posts when it turned out the conspiracy was... wait for it...a complete fiction.
So let's just post this one and wait for the little explosion. I'll keep my eyes on the horizon and see if the mushroom cloud erupts.
Which historic general are you?
These quizes seem to be growing in popularity among bloggers, so for some lighter weekend fair, why not give this one a try. Which historical general would you be?
Seems that I resemble a dead Roman general. Not exactly who I had in mind, but the old boy was effective.
Seems that I resemble a dead Roman general. Not exactly who I had in mind, but the old boy was effective.
| Scipio You scored 63 Wisdom, 70 Tactics, 54 Guts, and 63 Ruthlessness! |
You're most similar to Scipio in the fact that you're smart and ruthless. Scipio beat Hannibal by luring him back from Western Europe (where he was crushing legion after legion of Roman soldiers trying to gain support from local tribes) by laying seige to his home country of Carthage. Hannibal returned to defend his home and was defeated at the Battle of Zama. Ruthless, but it worked. Scipio was the conqueror of Hannibal in the Punic Wars. He was the son of Publius Cornelius Scipio, and from a very early age he considered himself to have divine inspiration. He was with his father at the Ticino (218), and he survived Cannae (216). The young Scipio was elected (c.211) to the proconsulship in Spain. He conquered New Carthage (Cartagena) almost at once (209) and used the city as his own base; within several years he had conquered Spain. As consul in 205, Scipio wanted to invade Africa, but his jealous enemies in the senate granted him permission to go only as far as Sicily and gave him no army. He trained a volunteer army in Sicily. In 204 he received permission to go to Africa, where he joined his allies the Numidians and fought with success against the Carthaginians. In 202, Hannibal crossed to Africa and tried to make peace, but Scipio's demands were so extreme that war resulted; Scipio defeated Hannibal at Zama (202), returned home in triumph, and retired from public life. He was named Africanus after the country he conquered. His pride aggravated the hatred of his enemies, especially Cato the Elder , who accused the Scipio family of receiving bribes in the campaign against Antiochus III in which Scipio had accompanied (190) his brother. It was only through the influence of his son-in-law, Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, that Scipio was saved from ruin. He retired into the country and ordered that his body might not be buried in his ungrateful city. Later he revealed his great magnanimity by his attempt to prevent the ruin of the exiled Hannibal by Rome. |
 |
23 September 2005
Mail-in vote follies continue
Enjoy this little story from VOCM, quoting city clerk Neil Martin on how smurfily goes the mail-in voting for St. John's city council.
Then pick up the Telegram and find the facts.
Martin predicted a couple of things: one was that the turnout would be over 60% and possibly as high as 75% this time. He also predicted that 90% of ballots would be returned no later than 19 September.
The city mailed out about 75, 000 vote-by-mail kits.
As of Thursday morning, the elections crowd at city hall had received 25, 000 ballots back. As of close of business Tuesday, they had 21, 000 according to a city hall official contacted on Wednesday by the Bond Papers. There is some confusion here about whether those are 21 or 25, 000 valid ballots or total ballots, but the point is still clear: the turn-out so far is about 30%, and it is not likely to get much higher. In other words, that's one third of what Martin expected and it will be lucky to crack 40%.
But here's a Telly kicker - of the ballots received on Thursday (as the Telegram tells it - might have been Wednesday), fully 600 were chucked in the bin as being spoiled. They either did not have a signed declaration with the vote envelope or the declaration had been included inside the vote envelope.
If we take the average daily vote return of 3, 000, that means in one day alone fully 20% of the ballots were spoiled. That is a horrendous number and may speak to problems with the voter awareness portion of this whole thing.
Beyond that, though, you may well have the complete disenfranchisement of thousands of voters simply because they didn't follow the rules. Maybe they were elderly and had trouble reading the information. Maybe they were illiterate. They still had a right to vote.
Then there is the possibility that thousands of other people voted twice or voted when they weren't entitled to vote.
This doesn't look like an election that is running swimmingly.
Nor are the ballots "flooding in" as VOCM claims.
Nope.
But then again, according to the city, that geyser on Temperance Street was proof that everything was working just fine in the city.
What, me worry?
Then pick up the Telegram and find the facts.
Martin predicted a couple of things: one was that the turnout would be over 60% and possibly as high as 75% this time. He also predicted that 90% of ballots would be returned no later than 19 September.
The city mailed out about 75, 000 vote-by-mail kits.
As of Thursday morning, the elections crowd at city hall had received 25, 000 ballots back. As of close of business Tuesday, they had 21, 000 according to a city hall official contacted on Wednesday by the Bond Papers. There is some confusion here about whether those are 21 or 25, 000 valid ballots or total ballots, but the point is still clear: the turn-out so far is about 30%, and it is not likely to get much higher. In other words, that's one third of what Martin expected and it will be lucky to crack 40%.
But here's a Telly kicker - of the ballots received on Thursday (as the Telegram tells it - might have been Wednesday), fully 600 were chucked in the bin as being spoiled. They either did not have a signed declaration with the vote envelope or the declaration had been included inside the vote envelope.
If we take the average daily vote return of 3, 000, that means in one day alone fully 20% of the ballots were spoiled. That is a horrendous number and may speak to problems with the voter awareness portion of this whole thing.
Beyond that, though, you may well have the complete disenfranchisement of thousands of voters simply because they didn't follow the rules. Maybe they were elderly and had trouble reading the information. Maybe they were illiterate. They still had a right to vote.
Then there is the possibility that thousands of other people voted twice or voted when they weren't entitled to vote.
This doesn't look like an election that is running swimmingly.
Nor are the ballots "flooding in" as VOCM claims.
Nope.
But then again, according to the city, that geyser on Temperance Street was proof that everything was working just fine in the city.
What, me worry?
Wells unsure on taxes
Over at the local website for the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, one can find the results of its mayoral candidate survey.
Here's the link to the St. John's results.
A few of incumbent Andy Wells responses stand out:
Asked about his stand on a municipal sales tax and a municipal income tax, Wells indicated he was "unsure". Hmmmm. Hope Andy doesn't plan on dipping into the public pockets after the next election to fix the city's infrastructure problems (Andy's wells, like the one on the east end of Duckworth Street). This idea could have gotten a firm "No!". Wells' waffling is a cause for caution.
Wells also thinks that city residents who cannot access municipal services - like water and sewer - should still pay full taxes.
Wells also favours eliminating "costly" red-tape and regulation. Andy has never seen a developer he wouldn't say yes to. Makes one wonder what exactly he considers to be "costly" regulation.
It's also an interesting attitude for a guy who the premier thinks is the right guy to manage the offshore regulatory board.
Here's the link to the St. John's results.
A few of incumbent Andy Wells responses stand out:
Asked about his stand on a municipal sales tax and a municipal income tax, Wells indicated he was "unsure". Hmmmm. Hope Andy doesn't plan on dipping into the public pockets after the next election to fix the city's infrastructure problems (Andy's wells, like the one on the east end of Duckworth Street). This idea could have gotten a firm "No!". Wells' waffling is a cause for caution.
Wells also thinks that city residents who cannot access municipal services - like water and sewer - should still pay full taxes.
Wells also favours eliminating "costly" red-tape and regulation. Andy has never seen a developer he wouldn't say yes to. Makes one wonder what exactly he considers to be "costly" regulation.
It's also an interesting attitude for a guy who the premier thinks is the right guy to manage the offshore regulatory board.
Why Connies don't get it. - Munsinger update
Anyone pondering the lack of electoral success for the federal Conservative Party need think no more.
This little post on a blog site favoured by Connies couldn't have said it better: Connies just don't get it. Canadians have opinions but they are tolerant of other opinions and lifestyles.
No matter how cutely this guy starts his piece, there's no question he is a homophobe.
Even if his speculation is true, the majority of Canadians are likely to read the post and ask:
so what?
[Via Bourque]
[Update - apparently local blogger Liam O'Brien found this post a bit too much to swallow so early in the morning. He posted a lengthy critique accusing your humble e-scribe of "McCarthy" tactics.
First, Liam claims the Western Standard post was actually about misuse of public funds. Ok. That's why I posted a link to the original article so people can go make up their minds for themselves.
Second, he tries to blow the whole thing off as a piece of parliament hill gossip. Well, if it was gossip - trivial information - then why did the WS print it? Gossip usually doesn't make news.
Third, the WS doesn't make Connie policy - no one said it did. Liam sets up a straw man and then sets him alight. Massive accomplishment there, Liam.
Fourth, the WS IS very popular among Connie party supporters. Note the links at the bottom of the piece from bloggers who have mentioned it. One of them, small dead animals, is one of the most widely read Connie blogs in the country.
Fifth, if it was about abuse of public funds, I just wondered why the lede - the opening bit - focused on Pierre Pettigrew's sexual orientation. Might the man be gay? Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Sixth, if the issue in some fashion revolves around a possible close personal relationship between a cabinet minister and a member of his staff - with the attendant notions of an abuse of taxpayer funds - can anyone point to the Connie bloggers who called into question an open, close - but heterosexual - relationship between two Connie members of parliament?
Did Belinda and Peter not possibly once tryst at taxpayers expense? Did young Peter, later politically cuckholded by Paul Martin, not once pledge his unending devotion to the former Connie star while collecting a federal paycheque? Did Petie not once endure the little death in praise of Belinda's ample...umm...assets...and later bill the minibar charges to the Crown?
Oh shock! Oh horror! [put hand to forehead and swoon with appropriate dramatic flair]
But they were heterosexuals.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.
Is it possible that other members of parliament - of all parties - have kept their mistresses on the public payroll to facilitate their illicit affairs? In those instances, the members of parliament were married and having illicit - albeit heterosexual - relationships with women other than their wives or husbands. Are the Connies ruthlessly attacking this phenomenon or is the Western Standard turning its journalistic cannons on those people? I think not.
For some perspective, maybe Liam and his pals need to check into the matter of one Gerda Munsinger. Liam probably knows all about the woman who was both a Soviet agent and the bed partner of several members of the Diefenbaker cabinet.
Liam might know since The Chief is Liam's pick for Greatest Canadian Prime Minister Ever.
But hey, read my post and read Liam's. Read the original WS post and you decide if the WS post is actually the McCarthyite political attack.
It's an old - and unsuccessful - style of political attack, Liam to accuse others constantly of what you and your friends practice as a matter of course.
This little post on a blog site favoured by Connies couldn't have said it better: Connies just don't get it. Canadians have opinions but they are tolerant of other opinions and lifestyles.
No matter how cutely this guy starts his piece, there's no question he is a homophobe.
Even if his speculation is true, the majority of Canadians are likely to read the post and ask:
so what?
[Via Bourque]
[Update - apparently local blogger Liam O'Brien found this post a bit too much to swallow so early in the morning. He posted a lengthy critique accusing your humble e-scribe of "McCarthy" tactics.
First, Liam claims the Western Standard post was actually about misuse of public funds. Ok. That's why I posted a link to the original article so people can go make up their minds for themselves.
Second, he tries to blow the whole thing off as a piece of parliament hill gossip. Well, if it was gossip - trivial information - then why did the WS print it? Gossip usually doesn't make news.
Third, the WS doesn't make Connie policy - no one said it did. Liam sets up a straw man and then sets him alight. Massive accomplishment there, Liam.
Fourth, the WS IS very popular among Connie party supporters. Note the links at the bottom of the piece from bloggers who have mentioned it. One of them, small dead animals, is one of the most widely read Connie blogs in the country.
Fifth, if it was about abuse of public funds, I just wondered why the lede - the opening bit - focused on Pierre Pettigrew's sexual orientation. Might the man be gay? Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Sixth, if the issue in some fashion revolves around a possible close personal relationship between a cabinet minister and a member of his staff - with the attendant notions of an abuse of taxpayer funds - can anyone point to the Connie bloggers who called into question an open, close - but heterosexual - relationship between two Connie members of parliament?
Did Belinda and Peter not possibly once tryst at taxpayers expense? Did young Peter, later politically cuckholded by Paul Martin, not once pledge his unending devotion to the former Connie star while collecting a federal paycheque? Did Petie not once endure the little death in praise of Belinda's ample...umm...assets...and later bill the minibar charges to the Crown?
Oh shock! Oh horror! [put hand to forehead and swoon with appropriate dramatic flair]
But they were heterosexuals.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.
Is it possible that other members of parliament - of all parties - have kept their mistresses on the public payroll to facilitate their illicit affairs? In those instances, the members of parliament were married and having illicit - albeit heterosexual - relationships with women other than their wives or husbands. Are the Connies ruthlessly attacking this phenomenon or is the Western Standard turning its journalistic cannons on those people? I think not.
For some perspective, maybe Liam and his pals need to check into the matter of one Gerda Munsinger. Liam probably knows all about the woman who was both a Soviet agent and the bed partner of several members of the Diefenbaker cabinet.
Liam might know since The Chief is Liam's pick for Greatest Canadian Prime Minister Ever.
But hey, read my post and read Liam's. Read the original WS post and you decide if the WS post is actually the McCarthyite political attack.
It's an old - and unsuccessful - style of political attack, Liam to accuse others constantly of what you and your friends practice as a matter of course.
Deficit? What infrastructure deficit? - updated
Interesting to see that the president of the St. John's Board of Trade, Marilyn Thompson, is actually contradicting St. John's mayor Andy Wells.
Wells, you may recall, claimed that everything with city infrastructure was just tickety-boo and that candidates like Simon Lono just didn't know what they were talking about when they claimed the city faced an infrastructure deficit.
Well, Thompson told a St. John's Rotary club on Wednesday that indeed the city did have an infrastructure deficit - that's the term she used - and that St. John's was going to have a problem coming up with the cash to deal with it.
Here's a link to the speech.
Here's a little excerpt: [Thompson said a bunch of other things that should have been said earlier in the campaign. Good stuff!]
"As I already mentioned, one of the City'’s biggest challenges is maintaining infrastructure.
The truth is that St. John'’s is facing an infrastructure deficit. We simply don'’t have the money it would take to meet all of our infrastructure demands. The City has been doing a fine job keeping up with those demands with the resources it has. But, significant capital expenditure is required in the operating budget to simply maintain existing infrastructure, let alone to upgrade and develop new infrastructure."
Thompson praised city staff for doing the best with what they had, but there could be no mistaking her agreement with Lono's basic contention that the city was falling behind in maintaining its roads, water and sewer services.
Poof. Turns out Lono was right after all.
This whole thing is even more interesting considering that only a few months ago Thompson was backing Andy to head the federal-provincial offshore regulatory board.
Wells, you may recall, claimed that everything with city infrastructure was just tickety-boo and that candidates like Simon Lono just didn't know what they were talking about when they claimed the city faced an infrastructure deficit.
Well, Thompson told a St. John's Rotary club on Wednesday that indeed the city did have an infrastructure deficit - that's the term she used - and that St. John's was going to have a problem coming up with the cash to deal with it.
Here's a link to the speech.
Here's a little excerpt: [Thompson said a bunch of other things that should have been said earlier in the campaign. Good stuff!]
"As I already mentioned, one of the City'’s biggest challenges is maintaining infrastructure.
The truth is that St. John'’s is facing an infrastructure deficit. We simply don'’t have the money it would take to meet all of our infrastructure demands. The City has been doing a fine job keeping up with those demands with the resources it has. But, significant capital expenditure is required in the operating budget to simply maintain existing infrastructure, let alone to upgrade and develop new infrastructure."
Thompson praised city staff for doing the best with what they had, but there could be no mistaking her agreement with Lono's basic contention that the city was falling behind in maintaining its roads, water and sewer services.
Poof. Turns out Lono was right after all.
This whole thing is even more interesting considering that only a few months ago Thompson was backing Andy to head the federal-provincial offshore regulatory board.
22 September 2005
Read this, city mail-in vote officials!
Architects of the St. John's vote-by-mail system could use this article.
As of close-of-business Tuesday, a total of 25, 000 vote kits had been returned. That's well below the anticipated increase in voter turn-out city officials predicted. About 4, 000 of those vote kits were not cast, representing people who were dead or who had moved. About 21, 000 valid votes had been accepted although the system has no way of preventing fraud, let alone detect it.
Anticipate that ballot returns will drop off over the next few days. Friday is the cut off for mailing ballots. Kits will accepted up to 2000 hrs (8:00 PM) on 27 September 2005, with counting taking place as soon as "polls" close.
My guestimate is that the turnout of cast ballots (as opposed to total kits returned) will hover around 30, 000. That's almost 10, 000 ballots lower than last time and well short of the 60% plus turn-out officials expected.
As of close-of-business Tuesday, a total of 25, 000 vote kits had been returned. That's well below the anticipated increase in voter turn-out city officials predicted. About 4, 000 of those vote kits were not cast, representing people who were dead or who had moved. About 21, 000 valid votes had been accepted although the system has no way of preventing fraud, let alone detect it.
Anticipate that ballot returns will drop off over the next few days. Friday is the cut off for mailing ballots. Kits will accepted up to 2000 hrs (8:00 PM) on 27 September 2005, with counting taking place as soon as "polls" close.
My guestimate is that the turnout of cast ballots (as opposed to total kits returned) will hover around 30, 000. That's almost 10, 000 ballots lower than last time and well short of the 60% plus turn-out officials expected.
21 September 2005
The value of proofreading
ok.
So I know that typos creep into the Bond Papers.
Sometimes they flood.
But here is another genuine example of the value of proofreading before submitting something as important [ed. original read: "importance"] as a continuance motion in court.
The counsellor in question apparently had back problems.
Read the motion, as filed.
Spell-check wouldn't catch that one.
[via Damian Penny]
So I know that typos creep into the Bond Papers.
Sometimes they flood.
But here is another genuine example of the value of proofreading before submitting something as important [ed. original read: "importance"] as a continuance motion in court.
The counsellor in question apparently had back problems.
Read the motion, as filed.
Spell-check wouldn't catch that one.
[via Damian Penny]
20 September 2005
Guerrilla campaigning
Technology is a wonderful thing.
This is a little 30 second spot Simon Lono generated for his municipal campaign. It focuses on the Duckworth Street water main break, which started over a week ago and remains unfixed. A new browser window should open and the vid will play using Windows Media Player.
When Lono took the clips using his digital still camera, the leak was a burbling little fountain. The idea of the vid was to contrast the water wastage inherent in the leaking main with the mayor's comments that the water problem in St. John's is due to people drowning their lawns every summer.
Yea verily, the mighty water main leak turned into a 15 foot geyser, so Lono is working on a second version of this video which will use the new geyser footage in the appropriate space.
Digital camera, plus a little freeware plus some time and energy and Lono managed to come up with a little video spot that while it isn't broadcast quality sure as hell will make an impact on the website.
It should also be circulated a bit through e-mails to people around town since the file is small enough to send as an attachment.
Keep an eye on the campaign to see what, if any impact this little story and the vid will have on the campaign. If nothing else, though, it sure cost a hell of a lot less than Ron Ellsworth Ward 4 campaign. The consensus among veteran campaigners is that Ellsworth will spend upwards of 45 large to get a job that pays about half that as an annual salary. One figure I heard today was that Ellsworth has dropped about $8,000 on bus sign advertising alone.
Wow.
This is a little 30 second spot Simon Lono generated for his municipal campaign. It focuses on the Duckworth Street water main break, which started over a week ago and remains unfixed. A new browser window should open and the vid will play using Windows Media Player.
When Lono took the clips using his digital still camera, the leak was a burbling little fountain. The idea of the vid was to contrast the water wastage inherent in the leaking main with the mayor's comments that the water problem in St. John's is due to people drowning their lawns every summer.
Yea verily, the mighty water main leak turned into a 15 foot geyser, so Lono is working on a second version of this video which will use the new geyser footage in the appropriate space.
Digital camera, plus a little freeware plus some time and energy and Lono managed to come up with a little video spot that while it isn't broadcast quality sure as hell will make an impact on the website.
It should also be circulated a bit through e-mails to people around town since the file is small enough to send as an attachment.
Keep an eye on the campaign to see what, if any impact this little story and the vid will have on the campaign. If nothing else, though, it sure cost a hell of a lot less than Ron Ellsworth Ward 4 campaign. The consensus among veteran campaigners is that Ellsworth will spend upwards of 45 large to get a job that pays about half that as an annual salary. One figure I heard today was that Ellsworth has dropped about $8,000 on bus sign advertising alone.
Wow.
What, me worry?
[<--- Not Andy Wells]
Our beloved mayor believes that everyone else running for city council doesn't know what he or she is talking about.
Here's a little blurb on the NTV website about the Duckworth Street geyser. It's from the story by Michael Connors that ran on the 19th.
The mayor's view of the problem is highlighted.
"A broken water valve in downtown St. John's burst into a small geyser Monday morning, spraying water 10 to 15 feet in the air for most of the day. Candidates running in the municipal election quickly picked up on the incident to call for more spending to fix the water system.
The valve on the corner of Duckworth and Temperance streets broke more than a week ago. It was part of an 80-year-old pipe that feeds all of downtown. The city hasn't cut off the pipe because that would mean shutting down water service to the entire area. A replacement valve is on order, but the water will continue to run until it arrives.
Councillor-at-Large candidate Simon Lono accused the council of wasting money on Mile One Stadium and mainland hockey teams at the expense of basic infrastructure. Deputy Mayoral candidate Fred Winsor agreed more money needs to be spent on the water system. But Mayor Andy Wells said the city already has a plan in effect to replace its older pipes. He said council has not been negligent about the water system and accused the other candidates of not knowing what they're talking about."
Of course, Andy's comments don't give any indication why this really old water main in the east end of St. John's hasn't been replaced yet, especially if, as Andy said, this section of the system is the oldest in the city.
Andy sure as heck isn't trumpeting the capital works plan as part of his re-election campaign.
Maybe that's why he is busily slagging the heck out of every other candidate, especially ones he doesn't like.
Of course, when you've been on council since 1977 and been the mayor for the past eight years and water mains start blowing up in the middle of the campaign, of course you'd claim that everything is fine and council is running perfectly and no one else knows what they are talking about.
Sometimes it seems like Alfred E. Neuman is the mayor of St. John's.
At least that what it seems like when Andy starts his "What, me worry?" routine.
19 September 2005
Water, water, everywhere...
And running down Temperence Street.
A water main break in the east end of St. John's has been sending water gushing down Temperence street since a week ago yesterday.
Today it was a shooting geyser, reaching upwards of 12 to 15 feet into the air.
Council crews were busily trying to deal with the problem - a week after it started - but so far there is no sign of it being fixed.
Flip over to Lono at large and you'll find Simon Lono's take on the whole problem of the municipal infrastructure deficit, along with a little video that is sure to ruffle the feathers of Mayor Andy Wells.
Municipal infrastructure deficit is a really big way of saying that council has been neglecting the public works it is supposed to be providing in favour of something else.
Great to fund stadiums and all that sort of thing if you have the cash. Not so great if there is a 15 foot geyser in the middle of Duckworth Street blocking accessing to residents of the neigbourhood and keeping tourist buses from an easy route to Signal Hill.
Speaking of tourists, German visitors to the city aboard one of Doc O'Keefe's love boats found the whole thing perplexing. A retired water engineer from Munich was amazed to see the gusher. He found it incomprehensible from the standpoint of engineering and found it troubling in light of the shortage of water in so many parts of the world.
Another gentlemen commented that they have the same sort of thing in Reykjavik, Iceland.
Yes, I replied, but there it is a natural phenomenon.
In St. John's, the geysers now seem to gush from our municipal water supply.
A water main break in the east end of St. John's has been sending water gushing down Temperence street since a week ago yesterday.
Today it was a shooting geyser, reaching upwards of 12 to 15 feet into the air.
Council crews were busily trying to deal with the problem - a week after it started - but so far there is no sign of it being fixed.
Flip over to Lono at large and you'll find Simon Lono's take on the whole problem of the municipal infrastructure deficit, along with a little video that is sure to ruffle the feathers of Mayor Andy Wells.
Municipal infrastructure deficit is a really big way of saying that council has been neglecting the public works it is supposed to be providing in favour of something else.
Great to fund stadiums and all that sort of thing if you have the cash. Not so great if there is a 15 foot geyser in the middle of Duckworth Street blocking accessing to residents of the neigbourhood and keeping tourist buses from an easy route to Signal Hill.
Speaking of tourists, German visitors to the city aboard one of Doc O'Keefe's love boats found the whole thing perplexing. A retired water engineer from Munich was amazed to see the gusher. He found it incomprehensible from the standpoint of engineering and found it troubling in light of the shortage of water in so many parts of the world.
Another gentlemen commented that they have the same sort of thing in Reykjavik, Iceland.
Yes, I replied, but there it is a natural phenomenon.
In St. John's, the geysers now seem to gush from our municipal water supply.
16 September 2005
How the Boor stole the election
[With apologies to Dr. Seuss]
Every Jawn
down in Jawn-ville
Loved their city alot...
But the Boor
who was mayor of Sin Jawn-ville
did not!
The Boor hated Jawn-ville! The whole of the city.
He detested each Jawn, loathed each Jawn-dog and -kitty.
As he sat in his office, he'd think day and night
of another sly scheme to shag Sin Jawns just right.
And when Jawns looked to vote in the mail-in election,
the Boor figured out how to screw Jawn selection.
"I'll just send out the ballots to Jawns who are dead.
And send more to addresses of Jawns who have fled.
I'll make sure there is no one to check who has voted."
Then he grinned a Boor grin. "I'll call out the devoted."
While the Boor knew that some of the Jawns thought him crass,
there were others who worshipped His Worship's Boor-ass.
He could count on those Jawns to do just as he wanted.
They would cheer. They would heckle. They'd vote Boor, undaunted.
The Boor sat contented on his mayoral throne,
surveying Jawn councillors he'd soon see gone.
There could not be a chance that the Jawn-ville election
would deny the Blahblahs their new concrete erection.
And those Jawn-agitators who'd clog voting pipes
with some anti-Boor Jawn-viller councillor types?
Those Jawns would need gagging. They'd need a distraction.
The city's procedures would give such compaction.
So the Boor urged that Jawns-bunch to file an appeal.
He smiled knowing Jawn-ville town rules would congeal
and his friendly White Board would keep every Jawn busy,
as they'd file and they'd write in a paperwork tizzy.
By the time that the board that was whiter than White
decided Jawn-queries were beyond its might,
all the votes would be cast and the Jawns would be knackered.
and the Blahblah store floor would be duly shellackered.
Then the Boor called some Boor-loving Jawns on the phone.
Told them they could set just the right Jawn-council tone.
If they'd tackle his foes then the Boor would print ads
to tell all the Jawns their incumbents were bad.
And the Boor grin grew wider, then wider than wide.
As he walked from his office, he beamed with Boor-pride.
He drove through the streets in his SUV truck,
smiling at every Jawn, as he mouthed the word:
"Schmuck".
Every Jawn
down in Jawn-ville
Loved their city alot...
But the Boor
who was mayor of Sin Jawn-ville
did not!
The Boor hated Jawn-ville! The whole of the city.
He detested each Jawn, loathed each Jawn-dog and -kitty.
As he sat in his office, he'd think day and night
of another sly scheme to shag Sin Jawns just right.
And when Jawns looked to vote in the mail-in election,
the Boor figured out how to screw Jawn selection.
"I'll just send out the ballots to Jawns who are dead.
And send more to addresses of Jawns who have fled.
I'll make sure there is no one to check who has voted."
Then he grinned a Boor grin. "I'll call out the devoted."
While the Boor knew that some of the Jawns thought him crass,
there were others who worshipped His Worship's Boor-ass.
He could count on those Jawns to do just as he wanted.
They would cheer. They would heckle. They'd vote Boor, undaunted.
The Boor sat contented on his mayoral throne,
surveying Jawn councillors he'd soon see gone.
There could not be a chance that the Jawn-ville election
would deny the Blahblahs their new concrete erection.
And those Jawn-agitators who'd clog voting pipes
with some anti-Boor Jawn-viller councillor types?
Those Jawns would need gagging. They'd need a distraction.
The city's procedures would give such compaction.
So the Boor urged that Jawns-bunch to file an appeal.
He smiled knowing Jawn-ville town rules would congeal
and his friendly White Board would keep every Jawn busy,
as they'd file and they'd write in a paperwork tizzy.
By the time that the board that was whiter than White
decided Jawn-queries were beyond its might,
all the votes would be cast and the Jawns would be knackered.
and the Blahblah store floor would be duly shellackered.
Then the Boor called some Boor-loving Jawns on the phone.
Told them they could set just the right Jawn-council tone.
If they'd tackle his foes then the Boor would print ads
to tell all the Jawns their incumbents were bad.
And the Boor grin grew wider, then wider than wide.
As he walked from his office, he beamed with Boor-pride.
He drove through the streets in his SUV truck,
smiling at every Jawn, as he mouthed the word:
"Schmuck".
15 September 2005
The new Tammany Hall
No matter how one feels about the Memorial Stadium issue, one must surely be repulsed by the blatant manner in which Marie White and St. John's local appeals board deceived the local committee who attempted to appeal the recent council decision to rezone the stadium site.
Everyone should be absolutely clear: the council decision was gazetted on 19 August 2005, before the appeal was filed with White's committee. At that point, the appellants should have been advised of what White now says was clear - the board had no power to overturn the council decision.
Instead, the board strung along the process, keeping the appellants tied up with busy-work, holding meetings, preparing briefs and otherwise staying out of the municipal election in which the stadium rezoning has been a major issue.
By the time White summarily shut down the appeal hearing, the election was virtually over. Ballots were mailed to residents on Friday, 09 September 2005 and, if past practice is a guide, fully 80% of the total likely to be received has already been returned.
One cannot help but feel that there has been some corrupt practice here. The timing of the ballots and the past voting experience was well-known to all concerned on the board. The board's lack of power was also well-known. If there was no corruption here - no deliberate rigging of the process - the only reason for the three week charade to which the appellants were exposed would be gross incompetence.
Marie White, the members of the board and their official advisors are not incompetent.
Marie White is, however, well known to be a political ally of the mayor, Andy Wells.
For his part Wells chose to make the stadium the centrepiece of his recent political action. It cannot be called a campaign since Wells withdrew from active campaigning on his own behalf some days ago. Instead the mayor's agents have taken out newspaper advertisements encouraging residents to vote against the five councillors who opposed the stadium redevelopment. Wells has played with numbers, making preposterous claims of the cost of reversing the rezoning decision and at times contradicting himself in the matter of a few days on his own estimates of the cost.
On the same day that White ended the appeal fraud, Wells delivered letters to voters in Ward Two attacking incumbent Frank Galgay (who opposed the stadium project) and pushing instead for Bob Crocker, a last minute entry to the race who does not even live in the Ward in which he seeks election. One, again, cannot help but wonder if Wells and Crocker are in collusion.
Wells may not be campaigning for himself, but he is surely campaigning for his allies. The cost of the letters will not be reported on Crocker's expense statement, should he win. One may wonder as well what, if any, other aid Wells' campaign has given to other candidates he favours.
The centrepiece of the now-evident corruption at city hall is the mail-in ballot process itself. This farce has been well-dissected on the Bond Papers before, in the Telegram, and more recently on radio call-in shows with reports of ballots being mailed to the dead and those otherwise long departed the city.
As noted here on other occasions, there is no system to detect vote fraud. Indeed, city officials have professed themselves unable to do even the simplest things to prevent a fraud worthy of Tammany Hall. This is nonsense: officials simply do not wish to prevent fraud. In the process they are clearly in violation of the Municipal Elections Act, including the provisions which allow the city to use an alternative voting system to the one prescribed in the act.
The very timing of the election and the use of mail-in ballots alone favours Wells and the incumbents. Most residents did not begin to pay attention to the election until after Labour Day. Ballots were mailed the following Friday, a mere five days later. As city officials and the incumbent councillors well knew, fully 80% of ballots were returned within three days of being received.
As a result, the election effectively ended on Wednesday, despite the official voting day of 27 September 2005. The strongest of Wells' likely critics having been kept silent until the votes were in, Wells managed to ensure that his only political competition remained a man whose sanity has come into serious question. Even had Wells' other challenger not been forced to withdraw from the campaign due to a family tragedy, there was hardly a chance that the aloof and unpalatable Vince Withers would have posed a serious threat to Wells and his machine.
In the end, residents of St. John's have re-elected the bully boy of municipal politics as their mayor. Another of his political cronies will likely take the deputy's chair by a landslide. Dennis "Doc" O'Keefe will be contented to talk of things he can do nothing about, like gas prices, or spend tax dollars chasing cruise ships, which, as a matter of fact produce the economic benefit of two decently located Tim Hortons coffee shops. Wells can count on O'Keefe's support, come what may.
As for the other councillors, those results will have to wait another two weeks. Irrespective of the outcome - whether all incumbents are returned or a few of Well's political foes are defeated - the Boss of the new Tammany Hall will weigh heavily on residents of the city and their wallets for another four years.
Everyone should be absolutely clear: the council decision was gazetted on 19 August 2005, before the appeal was filed with White's committee. At that point, the appellants should have been advised of what White now says was clear - the board had no power to overturn the council decision.
Instead, the board strung along the process, keeping the appellants tied up with busy-work, holding meetings, preparing briefs and otherwise staying out of the municipal election in which the stadium rezoning has been a major issue.
By the time White summarily shut down the appeal hearing, the election was virtually over. Ballots were mailed to residents on Friday, 09 September 2005 and, if past practice is a guide, fully 80% of the total likely to be received has already been returned.
One cannot help but feel that there has been some corrupt practice here. The timing of the ballots and the past voting experience was well-known to all concerned on the board. The board's lack of power was also well-known. If there was no corruption here - no deliberate rigging of the process - the only reason for the three week charade to which the appellants were exposed would be gross incompetence.
Marie White, the members of the board and their official advisors are not incompetent.
Marie White is, however, well known to be a political ally of the mayor, Andy Wells.
For his part Wells chose to make the stadium the centrepiece of his recent political action. It cannot be called a campaign since Wells withdrew from active campaigning on his own behalf some days ago. Instead the mayor's agents have taken out newspaper advertisements encouraging residents to vote against the five councillors who opposed the stadium redevelopment. Wells has played with numbers, making preposterous claims of the cost of reversing the rezoning decision and at times contradicting himself in the matter of a few days on his own estimates of the cost.
On the same day that White ended the appeal fraud, Wells delivered letters to voters in Ward Two attacking incumbent Frank Galgay (who opposed the stadium project) and pushing instead for Bob Crocker, a last minute entry to the race who does not even live in the Ward in which he seeks election. One, again, cannot help but wonder if Wells and Crocker are in collusion.
Wells may not be campaigning for himself, but he is surely campaigning for his allies. The cost of the letters will not be reported on Crocker's expense statement, should he win. One may wonder as well what, if any, other aid Wells' campaign has given to other candidates he favours.
The centrepiece of the now-evident corruption at city hall is the mail-in ballot process itself. This farce has been well-dissected on the Bond Papers before, in the Telegram, and more recently on radio call-in shows with reports of ballots being mailed to the dead and those otherwise long departed the city.
As noted here on other occasions, there is no system to detect vote fraud. Indeed, city officials have professed themselves unable to do even the simplest things to prevent a fraud worthy of Tammany Hall. This is nonsense: officials simply do not wish to prevent fraud. In the process they are clearly in violation of the Municipal Elections Act, including the provisions which allow the city to use an alternative voting system to the one prescribed in the act.
The very timing of the election and the use of mail-in ballots alone favours Wells and the incumbents. Most residents did not begin to pay attention to the election until after Labour Day. Ballots were mailed the following Friday, a mere five days later. As city officials and the incumbent councillors well knew, fully 80% of ballots were returned within three days of being received.
As a result, the election effectively ended on Wednesday, despite the official voting day of 27 September 2005. The strongest of Wells' likely critics having been kept silent until the votes were in, Wells managed to ensure that his only political competition remained a man whose sanity has come into serious question. Even had Wells' other challenger not been forced to withdraw from the campaign due to a family tragedy, there was hardly a chance that the aloof and unpalatable Vince Withers would have posed a serious threat to Wells and his machine.
In the end, residents of St. John's have re-elected the bully boy of municipal politics as their mayor. Another of his political cronies will likely take the deputy's chair by a landslide. Dennis "Doc" O'Keefe will be contented to talk of things he can do nothing about, like gas prices, or spend tax dollars chasing cruise ships, which, as a matter of fact produce the economic benefit of two decently located Tim Hortons coffee shops. Wells can count on O'Keefe's support, come what may.
As for the other councillors, those results will have to wait another two weeks. Irrespective of the outcome - whether all incumbents are returned or a few of Well's political foes are defeated - the Boss of the new Tammany Hall will weigh heavily on residents of the city and their wallets for another four years.
14 September 2005
Andy Wells IS campaigning
Contrary to his own claim that he had stopped campaigning, St. John's mayor Andy Wells is spending cash and campaigning actively.
He's just not campaigning to get elected.
He is campaigning to have his own allies elected and defeat his political enemies.
Like Bob Crocker in Ward Two. Crocker who only made the decision to enter the race at the last minute is getting help from Wells. The gag-loving mayor is sending letters to every voter in Ward Two attacking incumbent Frank Galgay.
If Wells is even partially successful, he can change the shape of council and control most seats in the chamber.
The city is moving towards Third World status very quickly. First, there's the dodgy electoral system. Now there's a mayor who is trying to get his own pals elected to council.
He's just not campaigning to get elected.
He is campaigning to have his own allies elected and defeat his political enemies.
Like Bob Crocker in Ward Two. Crocker who only made the decision to enter the race at the last minute is getting help from Wells. The gag-loving mayor is sending letters to every voter in Ward Two attacking incumbent Frank Galgay.
If Wells is even partially successful, he can change the shape of council and control most seats in the chamber.
The city is moving towards Third World status very quickly. First, there's the dodgy electoral system. Now there's a mayor who is trying to get his own pals elected to council.
Your tax dollars in action
Let's hope the Williams Family Foundation is footing the bill for this little bit of foolishness.
If the premier is feeling the need to find things to occupy his time, if he is a little bit under-worked, maybe he could try getting involved in a few files in his government.
Like say Abitibi.
If he's got wanderlust, he could try visiting Goose bay, Stephenville, Englee, Harbour Breton, Marystown, Ottawa (on behalf of Hr. Breton as he promised)... the list goes on.
What's next, I wonder?
Could it be a visit to the Price is Right set so he can hear Bob yell "Danny Williams! Come on Down!"
Maybe we can convert provincial elections to a game of Survivor so we can see who gets voted off the island.
Truthfully?
This is something Brian Tobin would have done.
If the premier is feeling the need to find things to occupy his time, if he is a little bit under-worked, maybe he could try getting involved in a few files in his government.
Like say Abitibi.
If he's got wanderlust, he could try visiting Goose bay, Stephenville, Englee, Harbour Breton, Marystown, Ottawa (on behalf of Hr. Breton as he promised)... the list goes on.
What's next, I wonder?
Could it be a visit to the Price is Right set so he can hear Bob yell "Danny Williams! Come on Down!"
Maybe we can convert provincial elections to a game of Survivor so we can see who gets voted off the island.
Truthfully?
This is something Brian Tobin would have done.
St. John's voting follies - the continuing saga
St. John's city clerk Neil Martin continues to follow the fashion and is blaming Ottawa (Elections Canada) for some of the problems turning up with the city's electoral system.
martin shouldn't bear personal responsibility for this. His problem is compounded by having a mayor and council who either have no idea how elections are run, don't care how to run them properly, or don't want them run properly. There's no other excuse for the fiasco that's unfolding.
Stories continue to float to the surface of ballots mailed to people who don't even live in the country anymore. In addition to the stuff on VOCM in the past 24 hours, I have collected stories of another eight ballots sent out erroneously to people who don't love at the addresses on the list or who don't even live in the city anymore.
Some of the people have been out of town for more than eight years.
Is it Elections Canada's fault?
Nope.
EC estimates that the voter list varies by about 17% each year. That comprises 13% due to address changes, two percent from people reaching voting age, one percent who died and another one percent who are new immigrants.
EC updates its voter list using federal, provincial and municipal databases. Obviously, the City of St. John's has some problems with its own databases. Either that or they got stuck with an old voters list.
In the worst case scenario, the current city election is being run with a list that out of whack by about 17%. That supposes there was no effort made to correct the federal list or that whatever city officials did was ineffective - like not being able to search and find that there was a guy named Gus and a guy named Augustus living at the same address in Ward Five.
City Hall claims there are approximately 79, 000 eligible voters in St. John's this year. We don't know if that represents the likely variance in the list (accounting for the dead and new voters) or if it just is a wild guess. There should be about 2,400 new voters, taking into account the number of deaths.
Taken altogether, we can reasonably conclude that the city voting list is out of whack by about 10%, give or take a percentage point or two. That puts about 8,000 ballots in play that will be sent to people at the wrong address, people who no longer live in the city or people who are dead.
In some races in the city, only a fraction of those 8, 000 potentially fraudulent ballots will be enough to tip the election in favour of one candidate over another.
Stand by for the legal challenges.
martin shouldn't bear personal responsibility for this. His problem is compounded by having a mayor and council who either have no idea how elections are run, don't care how to run them properly, or don't want them run properly. There's no other excuse for the fiasco that's unfolding.
Stories continue to float to the surface of ballots mailed to people who don't even live in the country anymore. In addition to the stuff on VOCM in the past 24 hours, I have collected stories of another eight ballots sent out erroneously to people who don't love at the addresses on the list or who don't even live in the city anymore.
Some of the people have been out of town for more than eight years.
Is it Elections Canada's fault?
Nope.
EC estimates that the voter list varies by about 17% each year. That comprises 13% due to address changes, two percent from people reaching voting age, one percent who died and another one percent who are new immigrants.
EC updates its voter list using federal, provincial and municipal databases. Obviously, the City of St. John's has some problems with its own databases. Either that or they got stuck with an old voters list.
In the worst case scenario, the current city election is being run with a list that out of whack by about 17%. That supposes there was no effort made to correct the federal list or that whatever city officials did was ineffective - like not being able to search and find that there was a guy named Gus and a guy named Augustus living at the same address in Ward Five.
City Hall claims there are approximately 79, 000 eligible voters in St. John's this year. We don't know if that represents the likely variance in the list (accounting for the dead and new voters) or if it just is a wild guess. There should be about 2,400 new voters, taking into account the number of deaths.
Taken altogether, we can reasonably conclude that the city voting list is out of whack by about 10%, give or take a percentage point or two. That puts about 8,000 ballots in play that will be sent to people at the wrong address, people who no longer live in the city or people who are dead.
In some races in the city, only a fraction of those 8, 000 potentially fraudulent ballots will be enough to tip the election in favour of one candidate over another.
Stand by for the legal challenges.
13 September 2005
City clerk on vote problems: missing the point
St. John's city clerk Neil Martin is missing the point when he addresses concerns about the mail-in balloting system being used by the City for this month's municipal election.
Martin told VOCM that the problem stems from the voter list supplied by Elections Canada.
As someone who has worked on campaigns for over 20 years and studied them for as long or longer, I can assure Martin the problems are somewhere else.
1. All voter lists contain inaccuracies.
2. Properly functioning voting systems take measures to catch those errors and correct them, all with an eye to prevent fraudulent voting either by:
- someone voting who is not qualified to vote; or,
- someone submitting more than one vote.
3. The Municipal Elections Act contains specific provisions to deal with both those issues. See particularly s. 40 and s. 41 which allow for a challenge of a voter's qualifications to take place at the time a person votes.
4. The City of St. John's mail-in voting by-law is supposed to conform to the spirit and intent of the provincial government's legislation. In other words, the St. John's system has to contain measures to address concerns about fraudulent voting.
5. The municipal by-law contains no provisions at all which prevent, limit or discourage fraudulent voting.
6. The St. John's system does not even contain measures to allow city officials to detect a potentially fraudulent vote.
7. City officials assume that all votes received are legitimate.
8. The ballot forms merely require a signature. There is no specimen signature on file to compare it to in order to determine if the signature is legitimate.
9. The on-line voter list system checks for name and birth-date. Simply adding birthdate to the form returned with the ballot would frustrate anyone who submits a fraudulent ballot.
10. The City of St. John's is ignoring vote fraud. Indeed, by deciding against any measures to prevent fraud, the city's position is tantamount to encouraging electoral wrongdoing.
Nothing will change as long as city officials ignore the problem and their responsibilities to run a legitimate election.
Here are some previous Bond Papers on the problem. Try here and here.
Martin told VOCM that the problem stems from the voter list supplied by Elections Canada.
As someone who has worked on campaigns for over 20 years and studied them for as long or longer, I can assure Martin the problems are somewhere else.
1. All voter lists contain inaccuracies.
2. Properly functioning voting systems take measures to catch those errors and correct them, all with an eye to prevent fraudulent voting either by:
- someone voting who is not qualified to vote; or,
- someone submitting more than one vote.
3. The Municipal Elections Act contains specific provisions to deal with both those issues. See particularly s. 40 and s. 41 which allow for a challenge of a voter's qualifications to take place at the time a person votes.
4. The City of St. John's mail-in voting by-law is supposed to conform to the spirit and intent of the provincial government's legislation. In other words, the St. John's system has to contain measures to address concerns about fraudulent voting.
5. The municipal by-law contains no provisions at all which prevent, limit or discourage fraudulent voting.
6. The St. John's system does not even contain measures to allow city officials to detect a potentially fraudulent vote.
7. City officials assume that all votes received are legitimate.
8. The ballot forms merely require a signature. There is no specimen signature on file to compare it to in order to determine if the signature is legitimate.
9. The on-line voter list system checks for name and birth-date. Simply adding birthdate to the form returned with the ballot would frustrate anyone who submits a fraudulent ballot.
10. The City of St. John's is ignoring vote fraud. Indeed, by deciding against any measures to prevent fraud, the city's position is tantamount to encouraging electoral wrongdoing.
Nothing will change as long as city officials ignore the problem and their responsibilities to run a legitimate election.
Here are some previous Bond Papers on the problem. Try here and here.
Setting Mulroney straight
Brian Mulroney has reared his head again, via Peter Newman's latest book, to blast all his old enemies in the profane way only Brian Mulroney can.
You can find a lengthy piece on Newman's new book here and by picking up Macleans this week.
The one part I wish to deal with is Mulroney's absurd characterisation of Clyde Wells during the Meech Lake debacle.
This is from the Globe's piece on the book:
As for Mr. Wells, [Mulroney] held the [roll of the] dice story [in the Globe and Mail] as proof that he and others had been manipulated, and so began the long, agonizing march toward June 22, 1990, when both Newfoundland and Manitoba backed off on their votes, thereby killing the accord. Mr. Newman writes that Mr. Mulroney flew into a blind rage over Mr. Wells's decision. "You know all politicians take liberties," Mr. Mulroney later told Mr. Newman, "That's the nature of the beast, getting kicked around and trying to get things done in an imperfect system. But nothing has ever compared to the lack of principle of this son of a bitch. Lookit, on the night before the vote I was standing in the rain on the doorstep of his house and asked him what the odds were. He told me that after my speech, they were good -- at least 50-50. This was after he had already made up his mind to cancel the vote."
For the record, I served as special assistant to then-Premier Wells from 1989 until 1996. I lived through the hell of Meech Lake at somewhat of a distance, although in the incident of which Mr. Mulroney speaks, namely the vote on the Accord in the Newfoundland legislature, I experienced it directly.
By "roll of the dice", Mr. Mulroney is referring to an interview he gave to Susan Delacourt, who at the time wrote for the Globe, as well as Jeffrey Simpson and Graham Fraser of the Globe. The interview was conducted in June 11, and appeared on the front page of Toronto's national newspaper the following morning.
"In it, Mulroney made it clear that he had deliberately timed the first ministers' meeting to ensure a crisis atmosphere, to maximize pressure on the hold-out provinces, and to include the holding of a referendum in Newfoundland." [Deborah Coyne, Roll of the dice, (Toronto: James Lorimer and Co., 1992)]
Mulroney admitted that what had previously been characterised as being the result of a need for finding common ground among Accord opponents was in fact the result of a strategy meeting held at the Prime Minister's residence a full month before the meeting. The Prime Minister was attempting to manipulate the situation. Mulroney described the process for fixing the date of the meeting, or as he put it, "the day we're going to roll the dice."
Mulroney's quote was typical of his arrogant boastfulness and it ultimately was federal arrogance, not the actions of any provincial politician, which robbed Mulroney of his glory. The word Mulroney seeks is not profane, it is hubris, or to be more accurate, the painful end visited upon the exceedingly arrogant as a punishment by the gods of politics.
The House of Assembly debated the Meech Lake Accord motion beginning on June 20. Premier David Peterson of Ontario and Premier Frank McKenna of New Brunswick addressed the legislature on June 20, with Mulroney and Saskatchewan Premier Grant Devine speaking on the 21st. As a side note, my staff duties for these occasions including co-ordinating the visits with the Mulroney and Peterson staffs.
Premier and Mrs. Wells entertained Mulroney at dinner at the Wells' residence on the evening of the 21st. Coyne notes that while Wells did not divulge the substance of the discussion, he did say that Mulroney believed the Accord would be rejected in the legislature.
Coyne also notes that caucus met after the House session closed after 11:00 Pm on the 21st to consider the implications of the vote in Newfoundland and in Manitoba. As I recall, public comments by the Liberal caucus members noted concern about the impact of a rejection by the Newfoundland legislature and, to some tallies such as mine, there appeared to be some waffling by cabinet ministers and backbenchers that may have seen the Accord pass.
It is clear, however that neither Premier Wells nor the caucus had reached a decision on adjourning the Accord vote at that point. Rather, as Coyne recounts, there was concern about the appearance of a rejection and a suggestion that the vote be delayed.
The tipping point came with the decision on Friday June 22 by the Mulroney government to extend the vote deadline for Manitoba if the Newfoundland legislature would approve the Meech Lake Accord. I recall standing in the caucus room as Lowell Murray, Mulroney's point man on the Accord, spoke live on CBC Newsworld outlining the proposal. Those caucus members who had previously signaled they might vote for the Accord immediately expressed their outrage. Even those allied with Brian Tobin, and hence likely to vote for the Accord at jean Chretien's whispered behest, changed their positions.
Views hardened almost immediately and almost unanimously in response to the perceived manipulation. I knew from traveling back and forth between the Premier's office and the legislature that morning that the Premier had been attempting to reach Murray repeatedly throughout the morning, and indeed was on the telephone on hold with Murray's office when the senator stepped in front of the television cameras.
My subsequent conversations with several of the office staff, but not with the Premier, confirmed that Coyne's account of this period is accurate.
Mulroney's comments in the Newman book are part of the ongoing campaign to foist blame for the Accord failure onto Wells. Mulroney never understood Wells from the beginning. The Mulroney government made no attempt to deal with him before June 1990, and I suspect the ever-arrogant John Crosbie likely had a large part in the misjudgment of Wells by the federal government.
The record speaks for itself on any point which Mr. Mulroney wishes to address. Unfortunately, the record does not support his contentions. One cannot be sure if his comments are merely delusions or part of concerted campaign of lies and deceit. There is no question that they are at odds with the facts.
As for the comment on Wells being an unprincipled son of a bitch, I can only say that, leaving aside the despicable comment on Mr. Wells' mother, Mulroney's remark demonstrates that he understood nothing - to call Wells unprincipled is tantamount to calling the Archbishop of Canterbury an atheist.
I have rarely met a more principled, conscentious and decent man in my life.
Would that the same could be said by anyone of the former prime minister, or for that matter, his former gaulieter in this province.
You can find a lengthy piece on Newman's new book here and by picking up Macleans this week.
The one part I wish to deal with is Mulroney's absurd characterisation of Clyde Wells during the Meech Lake debacle.
This is from the Globe's piece on the book:
As for Mr. Wells, [Mulroney] held the [roll of the] dice story [in the Globe and Mail] as proof that he and others had been manipulated, and so began the long, agonizing march toward June 22, 1990, when both Newfoundland and Manitoba backed off on their votes, thereby killing the accord. Mr. Newman writes that Mr. Mulroney flew into a blind rage over Mr. Wells's decision. "You know all politicians take liberties," Mr. Mulroney later told Mr. Newman, "That's the nature of the beast, getting kicked around and trying to get things done in an imperfect system. But nothing has ever compared to the lack of principle of this son of a bitch. Lookit, on the night before the vote I was standing in the rain on the doorstep of his house and asked him what the odds were. He told me that after my speech, they were good -- at least 50-50. This was after he had already made up his mind to cancel the vote."
For the record, I served as special assistant to then-Premier Wells from 1989 until 1996. I lived through the hell of Meech Lake at somewhat of a distance, although in the incident of which Mr. Mulroney speaks, namely the vote on the Accord in the Newfoundland legislature, I experienced it directly.
By "roll of the dice", Mr. Mulroney is referring to an interview he gave to Susan Delacourt, who at the time wrote for the Globe, as well as Jeffrey Simpson and Graham Fraser of the Globe. The interview was conducted in June 11, and appeared on the front page of Toronto's national newspaper the following morning.
"In it, Mulroney made it clear that he had deliberately timed the first ministers' meeting to ensure a crisis atmosphere, to maximize pressure on the hold-out provinces, and to include the holding of a referendum in Newfoundland." [Deborah Coyne, Roll of the dice, (Toronto: James Lorimer and Co., 1992)]
Mulroney admitted that what had previously been characterised as being the result of a need for finding common ground among Accord opponents was in fact the result of a strategy meeting held at the Prime Minister's residence a full month before the meeting. The Prime Minister was attempting to manipulate the situation. Mulroney described the process for fixing the date of the meeting, or as he put it, "the day we're going to roll the dice."
Mulroney's quote was typical of his arrogant boastfulness and it ultimately was federal arrogance, not the actions of any provincial politician, which robbed Mulroney of his glory. The word Mulroney seeks is not profane, it is hubris, or to be more accurate, the painful end visited upon the exceedingly arrogant as a punishment by the gods of politics.
The House of Assembly debated the Meech Lake Accord motion beginning on June 20. Premier David Peterson of Ontario and Premier Frank McKenna of New Brunswick addressed the legislature on June 20, with Mulroney and Saskatchewan Premier Grant Devine speaking on the 21st. As a side note, my staff duties for these occasions including co-ordinating the visits with the Mulroney and Peterson staffs.
Premier and Mrs. Wells entertained Mulroney at dinner at the Wells' residence on the evening of the 21st. Coyne notes that while Wells did not divulge the substance of the discussion, he did say that Mulroney believed the Accord would be rejected in the legislature.
Coyne also notes that caucus met after the House session closed after 11:00 Pm on the 21st to consider the implications of the vote in Newfoundland and in Manitoba. As I recall, public comments by the Liberal caucus members noted concern about the impact of a rejection by the Newfoundland legislature and, to some tallies such as mine, there appeared to be some waffling by cabinet ministers and backbenchers that may have seen the Accord pass.
It is clear, however that neither Premier Wells nor the caucus had reached a decision on adjourning the Accord vote at that point. Rather, as Coyne recounts, there was concern about the appearance of a rejection and a suggestion that the vote be delayed.
The tipping point came with the decision on Friday June 22 by the Mulroney government to extend the vote deadline for Manitoba if the Newfoundland legislature would approve the Meech Lake Accord. I recall standing in the caucus room as Lowell Murray, Mulroney's point man on the Accord, spoke live on CBC Newsworld outlining the proposal. Those caucus members who had previously signaled they might vote for the Accord immediately expressed their outrage. Even those allied with Brian Tobin, and hence likely to vote for the Accord at jean Chretien's whispered behest, changed their positions.
Views hardened almost immediately and almost unanimously in response to the perceived manipulation. I knew from traveling back and forth between the Premier's office and the legislature that morning that the Premier had been attempting to reach Murray repeatedly throughout the morning, and indeed was on the telephone on hold with Murray's office when the senator stepped in front of the television cameras.
My subsequent conversations with several of the office staff, but not with the Premier, confirmed that Coyne's account of this period is accurate.
Mulroney's comments in the Newman book are part of the ongoing campaign to foist blame for the Accord failure onto Wells. Mulroney never understood Wells from the beginning. The Mulroney government made no attempt to deal with him before June 1990, and I suspect the ever-arrogant John Crosbie likely had a large part in the misjudgment of Wells by the federal government.
The record speaks for itself on any point which Mr. Mulroney wishes to address. Unfortunately, the record does not support his contentions. One cannot be sure if his comments are merely delusions or part of concerted campaign of lies and deceit. There is no question that they are at odds with the facts.
As for the comment on Wells being an unprincipled son of a bitch, I can only say that, leaving aside the despicable comment on Mr. Wells' mother, Mulroney's remark demonstrates that he understood nothing - to call Wells unprincipled is tantamount to calling the Archbishop of Canterbury an atheist.
I have rarely met a more principled, conscentious and decent man in my life.
Would that the same could be said by anyone of the former prime minister, or for that matter, his former gaulieter in this province.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)