Wednesday, January 29, 2014

UPDATE ON Greencrow's NOTAI* for Electoral Reform

*NOTAI - 'None of the Above' Initiative

Minister of State for Democratic Reform
 Hon. Pierre Poilievre
Member of Parliament James Moore

On January 10, 2014 I sent the e-mail copied below to the Hon. Pierre Poilievre, Canadian Federal Government's Minister of State for Democratic Reform--with a copy sent to my local Member of Parliament, the Hon. James Moore.  To date, I have not heard from either elected representative.  I'm not surprised that James Moore has not contacted me...although I do regularly receive his tax-payer-funded mail-outs.  Moore is an arrogant young man possessing limited social skills who is not a natural politician.  Due to the dearth of qualified candidates from any party, however...he manages to get re-elected each election.  Unfortunately for him, over the past Christmas he committed a faux pas (said publically that the government was not responsible for the poor) so he may have a more difficult time in the next election.

I am somewhat more surprised not to have heard from Hon. Poilievre.  After all, he does get paid extra by the taxpayer due to his appointment as "Minister of State".  Perhaps politicians don't feel obliged to answer e-mails.  In any event, I held up posting this update in the hope of having a response from one or both politicians by now.  With today's announcement from Liberal leader of the Opposition, Justin Trudeau that he is eliminating the liberal senators from his caucus, forcing them to sit as "Independents", a timely update on my NOTAI ('None Of The Above' Initiative) is in order.

Justin Trudeau's Senate Reform initiative does not in my view go far enough--and does not even begin to address my main complaint about the current electoral system--"under the table deals" and collusion between the parties prior to elections.  It would appear these deals are made in order to deny the electorate an opportunity to observe the candidates debate important issues and, as a result, be able to cast an informed vote according to defined party platforms.  At first glance, Mr. Trudeau's "senate reform" appears to be more likely a pre-emptive distancing of the Liberal party's association from Liberal Senators, who are currently undergoing an investigation into their expense accounts by the auditor general.


Dear Hon. Poilievre:

I have been informed by Elections Canada that you are the Minister of State for Democratic Reform.  In that capacity, I am forwarding you a copy of an e-mail I received today from Elections Canada in response to one I sent them recently requesting reform to the Canadian Federal election ballot.  I am also copying links to my blog where I am publishing information regarding this request. 

I have copied my member of Parliament, James Moore, with this e-mail, as suggested by Elections Canada.  I look forward to hearing from you regarding further steps I can make in the process of formally requesting this alteration/amendment to the Canadian federal election ballot.  I believe this is an urgent matter--in light of the upcoming federal election scheduled for next year, 2015.  Also, in light of the news that the federal parties may be taking identical stances on the pipeline/tar sands issue, I believe we are in for another election campaign with under-the-table collusive deals between the parties to synchronize their platforms--in order to avoid public debate on certain crucial and controversial issues. 

Thank you very much for your attention to this request.


(signed, with my name)

Copies of earlier e-mails with Elections Canada:

File 395720

We thank you for your e-mail dated January 10, 2014.

There is no procedure for a protest vote at a federal election. Even if an elector wishes to use the ballot as a form of protest, the regular voting procedure applies; the voter places his or her ballot in the ballot box. The ballot is then counted and reported as a rejected ballot. Please also note that it is an offence under section 167 of the Act to destroy a ballot or to take a ballot out of the polling station.

Subsection 284(1) of the Canada Elections Act defines rejected ballots as:

284. (1) In examining the ballots, the deputy returning officer shall reject one

(a) that has not been supplied by him or her;

(b) that has not been marked in a circle at the right of the candidates' names;

(c) that is void by virtue of section 76; (d) that has been marked in more than one circle at the right of the candidates' names; or

(e) on which there is any writing or mark by which the elector could be identified.

Section 76 states:

76. Any votes given for a person other than a candidate are void.

We invite you to visit our Web site ( to access the full text of the Canada Elections Act.  For ease of access please use the following link:

We suggest scrolling down to Part 12 Counting Votes as it pertains to your question.

If you wish to submit a proposal for amending the Canada Elections Act, may we suggest you write to your Member of Parliament or the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, the Honorable Pierre Poilièvre (each of whose contact information can be found on the parliamentary web site)

For more information about the Canadian federal electoral system, please visit our website or call 1 800 463‑6868, toll‑free in Canada and the United States. Our hours of operation are from Monday to Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).

Marguerite-Lise Menard
Public Enquiries Unit
Elections Canada
Form ID           1607
Date submitted 1/10/2014 7:13:51 PM
Election May 2, 2011 General Election
Subject Other complaint
Electoral District Please select...
I would like to complain about the lack of choice in the last federal election in Canada held in 2011.
Even though polls consistently showed that most Canadians were opposed to the War on Afghanistan, all the
political parties appeared to collude to exclude that issue from the election they were all pro
war.  Consequently, I again had to spoil my ballot (as I did in the previous election) because I oppose the
war...particularly as it is based on the lies of 9/11.
It looks as though I may have to spoil my ballot in the next election unless all the Canadian soldiers have left Afghanistan and there is some movement by the Canadian government to apologize and make reparations to the people of the sovereign nation of Afghanistan for the illegal invasion.Even more significantly, this situation has taught me that the Canadian Federal Election Ballot needs to be adjusted so that it does not disenfranchise those who are opposed to the whole slate of candidates or their party platform(s).
I hereby officially request that another option be added to the list of candidates...that being "None of the above" and/or a place to write in another candidate not listed--or at least a reason for invalidating my ballot.  I would like this option placed on the ballot in the next election.
I also request that the results of this option be tabulated and published just like the other results.   Otherwise, if this request is not granted... I would like to know how I can make an official complaint about being disenfranchised in the Canadian elections, as they are currently formulated.
Please respond to this request at your earliest convenience, either by return e-mail or by a telephone
call.  I would be happy to elaborate on my suggestion to amend the ballot to enfranchise those Canadians
who object to collusion on the part of all the parties.
Yours truly,
(signed with my name)

No comments: