Corrupt Canadian Elections
written and witnessed by Daniel J Towsey
updated April 30th 2012
NOTICE; Please read my other article that provides much more information on this issue at,
I wrote this document entitled Remedy for our stolen democracy,
In hopes that you’ll realize that this is information which all Free Canadians need to know, to insure the protection of our democracy.
This statement has previously been released to all members of our Parliament.
This has been read by many people on-line at the Internet’s World Wide Web, at public forums, on line news medias…and more.
Remedy for Our Stolen Democracy
Dear Citizens: Please read this.
(originally written 2001 and revised after June 30 2002)
We in Canada have a very serious problem with corruption in our voting process.
It has been going on since approximately 1969.(since the use of computers) I witnessed this as a result of working on a federal election campaign.
We have a very old voting system that is extremely flawed. First, it has to be understood how a voting station (polling station) works.
Polling stations are manned by public volunteers from all represented parties. All activities and ballot counting is witnessed by them in the polling stations.
When the polling station closes, the witnesses manually count all ballots for each riding.
Then the results are reported by telephone to an undisclosed location (and local campaign headquarters).
At which time the someone sitting at a computer terminal can enter any vote results he or she feels like entering,
as there are no witnesses present for this process.
In Canada, there is no way to verify those computer results. As, all ballots are blank.
The ballots are useless once the witnesses leave the polling stations.
There is no way to verify the accuracy of the information that is entered in the computer bank.
We have no safe guards against the corruption of vote results.
Most corruption will occur in highly populated areas.
Since these activities will likely not be noticed.
Another thing to realize is that while the votes are being counted, no one knows what the vote count results are at the other polling stations in the riding,
and in this way if the results reported on the television are wrong.
None of the witnesses well be aware of it..
Realize that each riding has many polling stations.
So none of the witnesses really knows what the total vote count is for the riding..
This makes it very easy to corrupt the vote count.
Only the campaign headquarters knows the vote tally.
Please understand that once the witnesses take their eyes off the ballot box and leave the polling station the votes mean nothing.
The witness should be given a document signed by every witness indicating the vote count at that polling station.
Also the vote counts for each polling station should available on line after the election so they can be verified and scrutinized by the witnesses to make sure there is no discrepancies or errors.
This is not the case and that omission proves that that is deliberatly so.
And as I discovered when the fraud happens there is no remedy for it. Who would believe it.
It is to be understood that if even the smallest possibility for vote corruption exists.
Then all possible safe guards should be put in place for the witnesses to eliminate it.
I suggest that we put into place a system where all ballots have a unique UPC bar code on the backside.
Then each polling station would be allotted a predetermined number of ballots.
The location of each and every ballot would be accounted for, through the whole voting process.
The ballots would randomly and anonymously be given out to voters at each polling station.
At the end of the day the used and unused ballots could be counted manually as well as with a computerized counting machine (Scanned with computer).
All activities need to be monitored by the volunteer (public) witnesses.
The ballots will still need to be counted manually. In this way, all ballots will be accounted for in the whole country.
To further safe guard.
I repeat, Each and every volunteer will be given a printed signed copy of the results, to keep, before they leave the polling station.
So that results can be collaborated in the future by the volunteers at an on line site or manually through public records.
There should also be any other security safe guards put in place to ensure that the possibility for corruption never exists again.
Note; The chief reporting electoral officer should have no authority to do any certifying of vote results without public witnesses from the represented parties being present to witness all his certification activities…
Our votes need to be protected. Our democracy starts at the polling stations on the day we vote. Lets make sure it does not stop there!.
I AM A PROUD AND FREE CANADIAN…
Sincerely, Mr. Daniel J Towsey
All truth passes through three stages
First it is ridiculed
Second it is violently opposed (attacked)
Third it is accepted as self evident
Corrupt Canadian Elections [Aug 30 2005].pdf RIGHT CLICK SAVE AS TO DOWNLOAD
Canada’s voting system has the potential to distort electoral outcomes, expert says
MONTREAL – Canada’s future hinged on just a few percentage points Tuesday.
With just under 32 per cent of votes cast, the Parti Québécois eked out a narrow victory, winning 54 seats, to 50 for the Liberals, 19 for Coalition Avenir Québec 19 and two for Québec solidaire. The difference between the PQ and the Liberals was 0.7 of a percentage point.
But what if the PQ had won 34 per cent?
The result likely would have been a majority government, giving Premier-elect Pauline Marois a free hand to pursue her party’s sovereignist goals, said Harold Chorney, a professor of political science at Concordia University.
“They could have gone ahead with a referendum, could have gone ahead with trying to wreck the country and they would have had what democratic basis for this? Essentially, a third of the electorate would be enough to justify such radical policies,” Chorney said.
That scenario illustrates why Chorney and many other experts say Canada should adopt a form of proportional representation.
Canada’s first-past-the-post voting system, a legacy of the British parliamentary tradition, has the potential to distort electoral outcomes and leave entire provinces, regions and minority groups out in the cold, with little influence on government, Chorney says.
“It would have been much better to have a mixed proportional system in place, like they do in Germany,” he said.
Proportional representation is a system where the number of seats won by each party reflects the number of votes it gets. If seats were attributed purely according to the popular vote, the PQ would have 40 seats, the Liberals 39, the CAQ 34, Québec solidaire eight and the Option nationale two.
But most countries with PR actually follow a more complicated formula.
“Virtually everybody who advocates proportional representation, including myself, is talking about a mixed or hybrid system, where you reserve some of the seats as first-past-the post, constituency-based seats and you have an additional number of seats that are based on proportional representation, according to the standing of the parties,” Chorney said.
More than 80 countries, including the Scandinavian nations, Spain, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Ireland, have proportional representation, or PR.
Under the German model, also used in Scotland and Wales, voters have two votes, one for a local members of parliament and the other for a regional MP.
The system provides a more accurate reflection of popular support for the different parties in each region.
Even Britain, Canada’s political model, has moved toward PR, Chorney noted.
“It’s much better. It’s much more democratic and people feel less alienated. Their votes aren’t wasted no matter who they’re voting for,” he said.
In Quebec, the distortions caused by the current winner-take-all voting system have sometime resulted in a government taking power with fewer votes than its nearest rival, said Matthew Hayday, an associate professor of history at the University of Guelph.
“Quebec is one of the worst provinces in how the first-past-the-post system distorts the popular vote,” he said.
One reason for that is that anglophones and allophones overwhelmingly support the Liberals. Because those groups are concentrated in the Montreal area, their overwhelmingly pro-Liberal vote is under-represented in the overall outcome.
“I think that the fact there is the concentration of linguistic minorities in Quebec in certain regions accentuates and drives home the inequalities and the flaws in our current electoral system, which has an impact on democracy,” Hayday said.
“I think Quebec is the case that really shows just how inequitable it can be because you see just how wide the gap can be between the popular vote and seats in the legislature,” he added.
The big loser in this week’s election was the CAQ, which won only 19 seats even though it was not far behind the other two parties in the popular vote, with 27.06 per cent, Hayday noted. In past elections, the first-past-the post system has put the Liberals at a disadvantage.
In 1994, the PQ swept to power with a 77-seat majority government under Jacques Parizeau, with one-third of a percentage point more votes than the Liberals, Hayday noted.
In 1998, the PQ won a majority under Lucien Bouchard even though the Liberals won the popular vote by one per cent.
One reason Canada has not reformed its voting system either at the provincial or federal level is that winning parties welcome the distortions the system produces, Chorney said.
“Because they’re able to get into power with just 40 per cent of the vote, or 38 per cent sometimes, they like that, obviously,” Chorney said. (He was referring to past federal elections. In this week’s tight three-way race in Quebec, the PQ won with less than 32 per cent.)
“But they have to understand, when it works for them, it’s great, but when it doesn’t, they can be devastated and they can be reduced to a very weak little group of representatives in the assembly or parliament,” he said.
Proportional representation encourages coalitions where adherents to different political ideologies must learn to cooperate, Chorney said.
“It forces politicians who are ‘pur and dur,’ who are very ideologically inclined and stubborn, to accept that they don’t have all the right answers. You have to compromise and listen to other citizens,” he said.
The New Democratic Party and Québec solidaire are strong proponents of PR, also promoted by Fair Vote Canada, a citizen’s group.
In 2005, more than 57 per cent of voters in British Columbia voted in favour of PR in a referendum, but the proposal was defeated because approval required a 60-per-cent “supermajority.”
What are the chances Quebec will move toward a more representative voting system?
“Well, my old friend John Hotson, a brilliant economist at the University of Waterloo, used to say if you can think about it, then you can bring it into reality. What can be thought about coherently can become real,” Chorney said. “And it’s true.”
Thousands rally in Toronto against 2011 Election Fraud and ‘Robocall’ Scandal –
March 11, 2012
Copyright © 2012 TVAC. All rights reserved.
Election Fraud in Canada
The Deception by the Leadership of the COC
and Other Canadian NGO’s re Election Fraud
When will the real activists of Canada realize that the leadership of the CoC
has always been and continues to be the fifth column serving the purpose of
containing and preventing real activism and change. THey do great work in
researching and exposing the evil powers around us (the roll of the fifth
column- to deceive, pretending to be on the side of “good” ) but have never,
never, ever promoted or supported anyone or any group or any party that
committed to ending the evil practices.
They supported the “fluff” and actively campaigned against any one or group
seeking real democratic substantive change.
Like Canada’s major unions, The COC line has always been to sit at the table
with the globalizers drinking tea and eating crumpets, wining and dining,
talking endlessly about amelioration and humanization but going nowhere, except
marching protestors off to Timbuctoo as they did in Ottawa years ago (I was
there) at a globalizers meeting when the COC and Union and other NGO
leadership and the ndp and the environmentalists marched the thousands of
protestors away from the site of the globalist’s meeting and off into nowhere
Many of us did not fall for this trick but instead left the prescribed route
and marched up the hill, stormed the fences anyway, suffering the rubber bullets
The globalists play the song well in tune with our betrayers.
No, David, the COC is not at all “non political”. They are very political indeed
fulfilling Orwell’s double speak language serving the globalist masters.
Note that they only get active in “safe” fights. They are silent on chemtrails;
on smart meters; on the severe radiation hazard of Fukushima and our governments
refusal to protect and inform us citizens of the extent of harm and of
ways to ameliorate it; on Canada’s participation in the crimes against humanity
in the invasions and destruction of and thefts from the Middle East,and of the
murder of innocent civilians there; and most importantly they are silent on the
fraud and outright theft by the financial elite who are stealing with impunity
from the commons and deliberately imposing regimes of impoverishment on the 99 %
(the rest of us.)
It is only when enough of us rise above their deceit converging in common cause
that hope will succeed.
The amazing response of the people is way ahead of the COC. The job of the COC
now is to ensure that that response marches off to Timbuctoo again.
Quoting David Creighton <email@example.com>:
Good interview (below) Steve!
I know that the CofC is strictly “non-political”, but sometimes—such as when
we may have an actual ‘stolen election’—it may be worth being a little bit
partisan, n’est-ce pas?
Meanwhile, keep up the good work
On 09-03-2012, at 7:03 PM, Council of Canadians wrote:
Dear Council of Canadians supporter,
It’s only been one week since we launched our national survey on election
fraud but already the response has been amazing!
The Council of Canadians has received hundreds of reports, with claims of
deceptive and harassing phone calls coming in from concerned voters right
across the country. We’ve been able to get our message out even further
through the media, including nationally televised interviews (you can watch
these below). And new reports are coming in every day.
Thank you to everyone who has already filled out our survey. If you haven’t
yet, click here to do so now. You’re directly helping to expose the nature
and extent of these dirty tricks, and identify federal ridings where voter
deception or interference may have influenced election results.
Voters and candidates in a given riding can apply to defend their legal
rights under the Canada Elections Act. However, there may be an urgency to
act if sufficient knowledge has been gained of such attempts to deceive or interfere.
“Canadians need to understand their rights in the Act”, says Jean-Pierre
Kingsley, Canada’s former Chief Electoral Officer. “If an individual elector
in a riding feels that there has been an irregularity, fraud, corruption or
illegal practice that has affected the result, they can launch a legal action
to annul the result. It’s great that the Council of Canadians is working to
inform Canadians of this right.”
The Council is now analyzing all survey results by riding to determine next
steps, including the possibility of supporting applicants who wish to pursue
egal action. Ridings of particular interest have emerged, including:
Nipissing-Timiskaming – margin of victory = 18 votes
Etobicoke Centre – margin of victory = 26 votes
Yukon – margin of victory = 132 votes
Elmwood-Transcona – margin of victory = 300 votes
Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar – margin of victory = 538 votes
Mississauga East-Cooksville – margin of victory = 676 votes
Winnipeg South Centre – margin of victory = 722 votes
Don Valley East – margin of victory = 870 votes
Willowdale – margin of victory = 932 votes
Vancouver Island North – margin of victory = 1,827 votes
Kitchener Waterloo – margin of victory = 2,144 votes
South Shore-St. Margaret’s – margin of victory = 2,915 votes
Eglinton-Lawrence – margin of victory = 4,062 votes
We need your help and here are two ways you can right now:
1 – Please fill out our survey now. If you know someone else who received
fraudulent or misleading information around the 2011 federal election,
particularly in one of these ridings, please forward this on to them too.
2 – Make a donation now to help keep our Election Fraud Campaign moving
forward. And if you’re not yet a member of the Council of Canadians, join
It’s thanks to your support that the Council of Canadians is able to take a
lead role in this crucial issue. Working together as Canada’s largest
citizens advocacy group, we will vigorously defend this most fundamental of
our democratic rights.
The Council of Canadians
See below to watch national media coverage of the Council’s election fraud
campaign. And remember to fill out our survey at
VIDEO: Robocalls: CTV News Channel: Garry Neil, executive
VIDEO: Robocalled legal rights. Steven Shrybman, a lawyer for
of Canadians, discusses how Canadians affected by fraudulent phone calls
during the last federal election can assert their legal rights, CBC Power &
Politics, March 1, 1012
Hold the phone: Call for Democracy http://canadians.org/event/hold-phone-call-democracy -SHARE!
DEMOCRACY IS IN REAL DANGER! If you have never signed a petition, now is the time to sign! The Conservatives shut down debate on this “Fair Elections Act” and are pushing this 242 page bill through Parliament only 3 days after it was tabled. What they don’t want you to know about this bill? It will take away your democratic right to a fair and honest election. It will make it easier to commit ELECTION FRAUD. It will make it harder to investigate ELECTION FRAUD. It will make it harder for people to vote. It will MUZZLE ELECTIONS CANADA. (much like Harper has muzzled the scientists) Sign now and let your voices be heard.
Without warning, the Harper conservative government is ramming through legislation that will seriously undermine democracy in Canada. It was just introduced a few days ago, but could be adopted by the House of Commons as early as Monday or Tuesday.
But with enough pressure on Conservative MPs, we can stop this bill or at least slow it down.
Join us on Parliament Hill on Monday, February 10 for a mass call-in to Members of Parliament to stop the Unfair Elections Act. http://www.facebook.com/events/211027342437563/
If you can’t be there in person, including if you are outside Ottawa, join the synchronized action by calling the Conservative MP closest to your riding from wherever you are from 12:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. EST. AND EVERYONE CAN SIGN THE PETITION:
If you’ve never signed a petition – now’s the time! Democracy is sure in danger. At this very moment the Harper Conservatives are shutting down democratic debate on their so-called “Fair Elections Act” and trying to ram the 242-page bill through Parliament only three days after it was tabled.
SIGN & SHARE THIS PETITION: Investigate and prevent electoral fraud with a truly fair Elections Act http://canadians.org/election/letter-to-Harper.html
STOP THE UNFAIR ELECTIONS ACT
Harper’s new Unfair Elections Act:
– would make it harder for people to vote
– would disproportionately impact students and youth, Indigenous people, seniors, people on low-incomes, and people who didn’t vote Conservative in previous elections
– does nothing to bring to justice the people behind the widespread election fraud in 2011
– would actually make it harder to catch perpetrators of election fraud like Pierre Poutine
CALL FOR DEMOCRACY
WHEN: Starting at 12:30p.m. EST. At 1:00 p.m. a Member of Parliament will receive the petition for it to be tabled in Parliament. You can still sign it here:
WHERE: By the Centennial Flame on Parliament Hill in Ottawa & from coast to coast to coast
WHAT: Gather on the Hill, bring your cellphone, and join a mass call-in to MPs. If you are on Twitter, join the tweet-in by calling on your MP to stop the Unfair Elections Act and use the hashtag #UnfairElxnsAct.
You can find the contact information for your closest Conservative MP here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/parliamentarians/en/members.
You can also search for your MP based on your postal code here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseofCommons/MemberByPostalCode.aspx?Menu=HOC
You can find Conservative MPs on Twitter here:
Organized by the Council of Canadians and the Canadian Federation of Students.
Election reform ‘fair elections act’ bill an affront to democracy, Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand says
NO CONSULTATION WITH ELECTIONS CANADA: “The chief electoral officer has not been consulted, and we heard the minister’s comments,” said Elections Canada spokesman John Enright. “There’s been no consultation on the contents of the bill.”
LISTEN TO THIS INTERVIEW: Marc Mayrand – Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer. http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/The+House/ID/2435499519/
In this candid interview, Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer says if the proposed changes are made, Canada will be the only democracy in the world where the head of our election agency is not allowed to talk about democracy. It’s simply staggering. Please listen, tell your neighbours, your co-workers, your family members, and join in the phone campaign on Monday. Hold the Phone!!
Hold the phone! Call for democracy
What problems are the Conservatives really trying to solve with bizarre Fair Elections Act? http://bit.ly/1ecsk5t
5 things you need to know about Harper’s Orwellian “Fair” Elections Act – http://www.pressprogress.ca/en/post/5-things-you-need-know-about-orwellian-fair-elections-act
The Fair Elections Act hinders whistle-blowing http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Fair+Elections+prevents+whistle+blowing/9472219/story.html -D