What I think is most interesting is that [Langhorne] admits RMG told voters where to vote in their script, despite explicit direction from Elections Canada not to do so. Also important to recognize is that the script means ridings were called where no changes were made at all, so there would have been no legitimate or sensible reason to include that portion in calls made to 6 of the 7 challenged ridings.
In order to avoid confusion during the campaign, Elections Canada asked all the parties not to give voters the addresses of polling stations. The agency has advised the council that polling stations were moved in only one of the seven ridings in the lawsuit.
So Langhorne’s claim looks totally bogus and self serving to me.
Here’s what CBC finally published. See if it sounds like you just read it a second ago:
In an affidavit sworn Aug. 8, 2012, Andrew Langhorne, the company’s chief operating officer, provided a script used by its callers that asked voters to confirm they knew where to vote on election day and said, “Elections Canada has changed some voting locations at the last moment.”
But only one of the ridings actually had changes to its polling stations, says a lawyer representing the voters who mounted the challenge.
“Further, the [Conservative Party of Canada] directed RMG to raise the question of polling locations even though Elections Canada had specifically asked political parties to refrain from contacting electors to advise of such changes,” Steven Shrybman wrote in the factum presented to the court.
There’s a minor correction to be made in the CBC story. It lists 7 challenged ridings, but there are six ridings being challenged now, with Don Valley East not being challenged anymore (even though there were fraudulent robocalls there) because the deadline has passed and the elector who came forward was not in the riding she thought she was eligible in. Damn. I only hope that 6 by-elections triggered by “irregularities” have as much impact on the public psyche as 7 would. They should.
Also of interest may be this article. We’re still waiting, months later, despite the legitimacy of the government being seriously challenged in high court. What is the point of having laws that make it possible to invalidate election results, if they are not resolved in a timely manner? It makes 0 sense to take years (18 months already) to undo the results of May 2, 2011, when a subsequent election could plausibly be called first. That’s not an argument against the laws, it’s a demonstration of how inept those people charged with enforcing them have been at getting Canadians the justice we desperately need.