By Pepper Parr
March 1st, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
A Gazette reader questioned the original headline; he was right – The headline has been changed. Our apologies to anyone who was offended.
In this business information gets to us in the weirdest of ways.
Those two calls from a pay phone advising us more than a year ago that two very senior staff members had been shown the door turned out to be true.
Most of the time stuff that gets sent is an effort on the part of someone to manage the news the public gets.
The day before the election took place we received a link to a YouTube posting.
I had the feeling that I had heard from this guy previously but wasn’t sure.
He called me, saying he was an investigative reporter with proof that significant voter fraud had taken taken place.
I decided not to publish what had been sent.
When we learned once the polls had closed on Thursday that there were problems with at least two polls I decided I would pass along what we were given.
The piece runs for 25 minutes – is any of it true – originally I didn’t think so and I am not suggesting there is any truth to what was published on a YouTube chanel.
Elections Ontario is responsible for doing any investigations.
Readers will have to decide if there is any merit to what we have published.
The link to what we were sent is HERE.
I am curious as to which candidate your headline is referring to. Can you be more explicit on that please, Mr. Parr?
Editor’s note:
Afraid not.
I listened to the podcast just now. It is quite obviously that the person recording this information had only one wish to increase the number of people listening to his podcast. This would provide increased revenue for him.
I have no respect for someone who does not show his face. It is one thing not to show the people he duped into answering his questions but for him to remain “incognito” is cowardly.
I agree with Ted Gamble.
“My question is simply if this indeed is the current state of the law Elections Act then what is the motivation of our Editor to reference this to a specific candidate in a specific riding in the articles title?”
Editor’s note: The headline was re-written
Changing the headline does change the intent.
I voted early at the Burlington Centre. I had my voter registration card and was asked in addition to provide a piece of I.D. that had not only a photo of myself but also my address.
Everyone at that polling station was asked for this information.
I listened to the video and read the information on the Elections Ontario web site which lists the alternate information that can be used other than a voter registration card.
My question is simply if this indeed is the current state of the law Elections Act then what is the motivation of our Editor to reference this to a specific candidate in a specific riding in the articles title?
Editor’s note: The headline was re-written
There should only be one way to vote, in person with voter ID, nothing else. also the person with the most votes should win. Run the damn thing again.
If residents cannot provide the appropriate current photo ID and proof of address and proof of Citizenship when asked, then they should not be allowed to vote period. A envelope with a address printed on it should not be proof of anything!
Times have changed in our country.
Our Provincial, Federal and Municipal governments need to reinforce that only those that are legally allowed to vote in Canada get that privilege and no one else.
If this in fact is what is going on with our Elections, it’s appalling and should not be allowed. Photo ID should be a mandatory requirement such as a current Driver’s Licence and or a current Health Card.
Signing a personal attestation is meaningless!! Especially when someone wants to scam the system.
Our Election rules must change immediately.
The Federal Election is next.