‘We don’t have any information about what happened in Guelph’


Whatever Peter MacKay said, Dean Del Mastro says the government doesn’t know what happened in Guelph.

Del Mastro again denied accusations from opposition parties that his party engaged in a voter suppression campaign, but told host Evan Solomon it appears that “what went wrong in Guelph was in fact untoward, it was intentional.”

“The allegations of what happened there [in Guelph] are serious. There seems to be an awful lot of evidence that people received these misleading calls,” said Del Mastro.

“We don’t know what happened in Guelph. We don’t have any information about what happened in Guelph. But what we can say is that the allegations that have come forward and the evidence that we’ve seen which is all public — we have no more information than anyone else on this — is troubling.”


‘We don’t have any information about what happened in Guelph’

  1. This is perfect example of why we need new attitude within msm. I didn’t hear this interview, but I am certain Solomon didn’t directly ask Del Mastro why, if Cons don’t know what happened in Guelph, were Cons and their minions spreading Sona’s name around before elections canada supposedly even talked to him.

    Also, why is no one asking why Elections Canada has done nothing about these reports from Guelph. Surely, EC exists to investigate election fraud but here we are a year later, and ec officials are standing around with their thumbs up their bums and minds in neutral. 

    Our pols and bureaucracy and msm are all very clubbable with one another, they have a way of protecting their own. There are constant political scandals in US and UK but here in Canada our msm works hard to keep public employees nefarious activities secret and electorate ignorant. Wells first rule is spot on because our msm and public employees want it like that.   

    I live in Guelph and was at a dinner party on Saturday and the left wing kooks here are outraged at Cons for stealing elections and at elections canada for being in cahoots with Cons to deny voter suppression occurred last year.

    • What do the left wing kooks want? 
      Do they want Elections Canada to investigate why the Conservatives lost the election in Guelph?

      • What does The Illuminati want? This was taken from an article in The Star:

        “The Conservatives have outstripped other parties over the past decade in
        fundraising and honing its political machine. The party effectively
        uses the resources of the powerful Conservative global organization, the
        International Democratic Union (IDU), a coalition of member parties
        including the U.S. Republicans, the Canadian and U.K. Conservative
        parties and, in the Australia, the centre-right Liberals.”

        • Why are the left wing kooks protesting the Liberal win in the election in Guelph?
          Is there even one Liberal-NDP voter who can prove that he was prevented from voting his choice?
          Why would an obviously random and disorganized telemarketing effort be portrayed as the greatest electoral fraud in history by a government?
          { I`ll answer this one for you:  Left wing media and bloggers and desperate and bitter opposition.

          I`m not sure why you chose to praise the Conservative Party global  popularity, other than as a sorry comparison to the feeble respect the Liberal Party has on the international stage.

    • Actually, Solomon asked why Sona was fired/resigned. You’ll be shocked to hear that Del Mastro has “no information” on that.

      Help me understand something. On one hand, you say: “why is no one asking why Elections Canada has done nothing about these reports from Guelph. Surely, EC exists to investigate election fraud…”

      And then you say: “…the left wing loons here are outraged at Cons for stealing elections and at elections canada for being in cahoots with Cons to deny voter suppression occurred last year. “

      So you agree that there seems to have been electoral fraud, at least in Guelph. And you’re frustrated that EC isn’t moving more quickly on an investigation.

      So what are these “left wing loons” saying beyond those points? Because the difference between what you’re saying and the looniest extreme seems to be:

      1) The Conservatives perpetrated the election fraud (hardly seems unreasonable)
      2) EC is collaborating with the Cons to hide the fraud (that’s a bit of a leap, with no evidence I’ve seen to date)

      What else are these loons talking about? Did you speak to them directly?

      • “Actually, Solomon asked why Sona was fired/resigned.”

        I didn’t explain myself very well – Canada needs a Jeremy Paxman desperately. The problem is that msm asks questions, pols answer and then they move on to next question. I wish one journo would say, ‘sorry Del Mastro, your answer is complete and utter bollocks and I would like a better answer’. 

        I was under orders from my partner to not make everyone crazy like I usually do.  She wanted a quiet night with her friends and colleagues, and I was a good boy, so I just listened to people and kept my thoughts to myself. 

        Two people at this party said they received dodgy calls on election day and they filed complaints with elections canada on day of election and then again next day. Elections Canada supposedly didn’t talk to Sona until a few days ago. ‘Why the delay’ was the gist of their argument and then other dinner party people let fly with inchoate conspiracy theories and solutions – new by-elections, new national elections, dunk Harper in Rideau and see if he floats …. usual stuff.

        • You do enjoy quoting Trudeau going into the HoC – Just watch me…

          Well for this to happen a journalist must have had the opportunity to ask the question and a politician be willing to give answers.  When was the last time you saw our prime minister being questioned by politicians in the halls of the HoC or going up or down the stairs in the HoC?  I remember Mulroney enjoying doing this; I’ve seen Chrétien repeatedly doing this.  I may have missed something but I don’t think Mr. Harper has done this once in six years.  Of course you won’t get journalists asking difficult questions in these circumstances.  From what I read journalists have to submit questions beforehand in press conferences these days.  This is new to Canada – since Harper became PM, as far as I know. Why blame the media when the politician sets the rules?

          • It might have something to do with the PPG declaring war on Harper when he was first elected PM.

          • Have you thought about extending your tinfoil hat down over your mouth?  Might work a little better.

          • Yes, because Harper started out so open and accountable the press took advantage of him.  Poor guy, never had  chance.

          • The MSM have been mostly lap dogs to Harper since he became PM.  There is so much they could have dug into but no – it’s all about tactics and strategy – never about policy or wrong direction for the country.

          • “Well for this to happen a journalist must have had the opportunity to ask the question and a politician be willing to give answers. ”

            Msm are adults, what is stopping them from asking questions now? Pols are on news shows all the time and no ever asks them difficult questions. Del Mastro had poor week because he’s use to msm and their stenography but story is getting away from msm and pols. 

          • You need to watch PnP on CBC.  Evan nailed him all week, because everything Del Mastro  said proved out to be false. 

          • I believe, at least when it comes to asking Stephen Harper questions, it’s the RCMP that stops them.

          • ”  Evan nailed him all week, because everything Del Mastro  said proved out to be false.”

            I think it was A Coyne’s twitter I was reading on friday and it was hysterical – Coyne rt a bunch of people cracking wise about Del Mastro’s appearance so I made sure to watch it. 

            Del Mastro was clearly wrong in just about everything he was saying, it had nothing to do with Solomon’s interview skills. 

        • “The problem is that msm asks questions, pols answer and then they move on to next question.”

          I emphatically agree!

        • ‘Inchoate conspiracy theories’ – and you didn’t flatten them with your mass hysteria theory.  That partner of yours sounds like  real drag.

    • Obviously EC have been investigating !  They warned of these activities before and on the day of the election. Check online, you’ll find news reports appearing on May 2nd on the CBC website (Elections Canada warns voters over false poll calls), about problems reported in Guelp.


      Maybe you should start canvassing your MP to lift the veil of secrecy that surrounds HoC committees meetings, now held in camera, for affairs pertaining to Elections Canada.

  2. I remain deeply suspicious about the meaning of any words any conservative politician uses to describe the state of things. They themselves have poisoned the well. They have used hair-splitting legalities to define their meaning only after they have been pressed to explain themselves. They fabricate meaning to suit themselves.

    Consider then, that “don’t have” can mean, “Does not have”, “does not presently have”, “no longer has” any evidence.

  3. I wonder if Wherry will post news about the latest polling information related to this “scandal.” I wouldn’t hold my breath. “Journalism” at its finest, eh?

    Oh, and I suppose I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the pattern here. The professional left-wing and the media cry foul over some otherwise obscure story. They keep crying foul. The public doesn’t care. Oh, how Canadian democracy is served by the process!

    • National Review ~ Conservatives In The Mist:

      But, my point is, whenever I read liberals reporting about the goings-on of conservatives I always get the nature-documentary vibe. A liberal reporter puts on his or her Dian Fossey hat in order to attempt to write another installment of Conservatives in the Mist. I’ve followed this particular brand of reporting for years, it’s almost a fetish of mine. Most attempts fail. Of these lesser varieties, there’s fear (“Troglodytes!”), mockery (“Irrelevant troglodytes!”), condescension (“I had to explain to them they’re troglodytes.”), bewilderment (“Why don’t they understand they’re troglodytes?”), astonishment (Dear God, they’re not all troglodytes!”), and a few combinations of all the above.

      But sometimes they even succeed, to a point. Thus, like the real Dian Fossey, they manage to saunter into the leafy thickets of conservatism, and are welcomed into a band of gorillas. They hold out the equivalent of a banana or maybe a fistful of grubs for long enough and eventually we come sniffing around. We’re intrigued by the creature lavishing attention on us. And the reporter eventually begins to feel as though he has been accepted into the band. Eventually, we conservatives grow comfortable enough around them to return to our old patterns. We scratch and fight and do our gorilla things and the chronicler dutifully takes notes. The notes eventually make their way into an article for the New York Times or The New Yorker or Vanity Fair.

      “Who knew?” the readers will say over their morning bagels and coffee in Southampton or Fire Island, “I had no idea conservatives were such intelligent creatures. Why they even have the capacity for emotion and even some rudimentary forms of kindness.”

      • I tuned in for the end of CTV Question Period yesterday and watched 5 liberals talk about telemarketing and bemoan the fact that Canadians were not lining up behind them in calling for a new contempt ruling or whatever.

        At the end of the segment it was amusing to see them all agree that poor stupid apathetic Canadians are to blame for not taking to the streets. The five of them seem to agree with the opposition that if they continue to tell the public that they are stupid, then the public will eventually agree with them–definitely a winning strategy, for the Conservatives.

        • I have not yet watched yesterday’s QP but I can only imagine. Kent, Oliver, Gardner, Galloway all in high dudgeon about how appalling Conservatives are. Blah blah blah.  

          I think Lib and left wing msm is big problem and why our overall governance is dire. msm always attacks Cons – no one else – even tho there are stories in news right now about NDP election shenanigans in Que and Sask, Libs laundered tens of millions of $$$ to subvert elections and msm barely notices. 

          I remember reading study last year and it made me wonder if Lib msm actually helps Cons. Cons look like law breakers all the time, they appear powerful and that’s what people want in leader. Pols ratings often increase after scandal, apparently electorate like it when pols are naughty. 

          Science Daily – May 2011:
          When people have power, they act the part. Powerful people smile less, interrupt others, and speak in a louder voice. When people do not respect the basic rules of social behavior, they lead others to believe that they have power, according to a study in the current Social Psychological and Personality Science.

          • I`ll go even further in lamenting the antics of the msm. They are a detriment to democracy.
             Their continued attempt to lead a story by practically giving instructions to those partisan NDP-Liberal supporters on how to protest loud and long about even stories that are a matter of process has turned off Canadians so much that legitimate reasons for the public to be upset are lost in the ever present cry-wolf strategy employed by the msm.

    • Sorry,  unfavorable latest polling data just like a follow-up on Liberal admission of guilt on the Vikileaks story has no place on this blog.
      Please refrain from reminding the locals.

    • When Watergate first broke in June 1972, Nixon’s approval ratings were near their highest (over 60%), and actually hit a peak of 67% in January 1973.  They only then began a steady decline several months after the fact, and never recovered.  Only 24% of Americans still approved of him when he finally resigned 2 years later.


      Public opinion is not that instantaneous.  Opinion polls in 6 months, 12 months time will help reveal public opinion on this issue.  Not today’s.

      • Here we go again. If treating every fake Harper scandal during the past five years as though it were Watergate didn’t work, why in the world do you think it would work this time around. Man.

        • My intent is not to compare the robocalls to Watergate.  My point is public opinion does not necessarily change in an instantaneous manner, but just because it doesn’t change today does not mean it will not react to the robocall allegations in the future.

          Don’t read what isn’t there.

          • If your intent is not to compare robocalls to Watergate, then you probably shouldn`t mention Watergate

          • Watergate is the prototype on how not to do damage control.  Watching Dean Del Mastro last week, I don’t know how you could not be reminded of Watergate. Bungling is the operative word.  He’s at it again this morning.  It has come out that a Conservative requested a list of voting stations from Elections Canada.  EC sent it out to all parties with the instructions that the parties should not be advising voters of locations because they could be changed.  They were told to refer voters to EC to confirm locations.  This morning in QP there is Dean saying Conservtives were telling voters where polling stations were.  He is either stupid or the people preparing the messaging are. 

          • What is there was the citing of Watergate. You chose to use that example. Not me.

          • Well gee, zing, ya got me I guess.  Bravo…

          • Thank you. Next.

    • Standard appeal to the masses. 

      What would you rather happen, Dennis? That everyone just kept quiet and let these dirty tricks and voter suppression tactics continue on silently?

      • I’m thinking that he doesn’t mind if it’s in the CPC’s self-interest. 

        • That’s a common accusation from knee-jerk types like yourself who can’t reply with substance or logic. Thanks. Next.

      • How about justifying your smears against people who happen to disagree with you? How about focusing on matters of real importance to Canadians, and not these endless witch hunts?

        • So yes, then.

          • No, of course I don’t accept your hateful and dishonest premise, and those of your knee-jerk friends on here. Man, are you ever desperate.

          • So.. you don’t accept that we should just let it happen, but at the same time, you’re upset that people are complaining about it. Kinda doesn’t leave too many options, does it?

          • Let what happen? Complaining about what? What in the world are you and your knee jerk buddies going on about now? God.

          • Knock it off, Napoleon! Make yourself a dang quesadilla!

Sign in to comment.