BATTLE RIVER, AB – Voters in the sprawling rural Alberta riding of Battle River-Crowfoot are set to face an unprecedented ballot on August 18, with close to 80 independent candidates already registered to challenge Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre. This electoral spectacle, orchestrated by the so-called “Longest Ballot Committee,” is a transparent attempt to exploit democratic processes, drawing considerable criticism for its disruptive nature and questionable motives.
The sheer volume of candidates – expected to swell to over 200, more than double the 91 who ran in Poilievre’s former riding of Carleton – threatens to turn the by-election into a farcical exercise. Beyond the independent hopefuls, the ballot will also feature candidates from the United Party of Canada, the Libertarian Party of Canada, and the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, alongside Poilievre.
This deliberate flooding of the ballot is nothing short of a “scam,” as said by Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre during a town hall in Stettler, Alta., last week. Hometown Media, a local news outlet, posted clips of the event where Poilievre declared, “We have to take action because this is a scam. It is unfair, it is unjust and it must stop.” His comments underscore the growing frustration with the Longest Ballot Committee’s tactics, which have caused significant delays in vote counting and confused electors in past elections.
The Longest Ballot Committee claims its goal is to “protest the first-past-the-post electoral system” and advocates for a citizens’ assembly to oversee electoral reform, arguing that political parties are inherently biased in shaping election rules. However, their actions – consistently targeting safe Conservative ridings recently – reveal a distinct lack of genuine protest aimed at broader electoral reform. Instead, it appears to be a calculated maneuver designed to inconvenience and discredit the democratic process, and undermine the election chances of Conservative candidates.
The August 18 by-election in Battle River-Crowfoot was triggered by the resignation of Damien Kurek, who had just been re-elected as MP with nearly 83 per cent of the vote in the April general election, to give Poilievre a relatively safe riding to run in. Poilievre, having lost his Ottawa-area riding of Carleton on account of Liberal amalgamation strategies and ‘Longest Ballot’ nonsense, is now seeking to regain a seat in the House of Commons in this highly Conservative stronghold. Kurek, for his part, has since taken a position with Upstream Strategy Group, a government relations, public relations, and strategic communications firm, but the Conservative Party and Kurek have indicated he will run in the riding again in the next general election.
The ongoing “longest ballot” sham has prompted calls for electoral law reform. Poilievre has suggested measures such as requiring 1,000 signatures for a candidate to run, and crucially, ensuring that voters can only sign one nomination form. He told the Stettler crowd that such changes “would make it impossible for 200 people to go out and have their names piled onto the [candidate] list,” ensuring “only real candidates who are truly running to put their name forward in our democracy are on that list.” Currently, candidates need only 100 signatures from voters in their riding, and electors are not prohibited from signing multiple forms.
The so-called “Longest Ballot Committee” has scoffed at Poilievre’s proposals, arguing that such a significant increase in required signatures would have a “negative impact on Canadian democracy.” In a statement, the group asserted, “This ill-conceived and self-serving electoral reform proposal by [Poilievre] is downright dangerous, and reinforces our conviction that politicians are not well suited to decide the rules of their own elections.” They have vowed to continue their long ballot protests “as long as we are legally permitted to do so.”
Concern about the Longest Ballot Committee’s tactics extends beyond Poilievre. Chief Electoral Officer Stéphane Perrault, while generally favouring a lower signature threshold, has proposed “certain penalties” for individuals who sign – or encourage others to sign – multiple nomination papers to inflate the candidate list. He did not specify the nature of these penalties. Legislation introduced last session to lower the signature threshold to 75 died when the House was prorogued in January.
The committee’s actions have also drawn the ire of other candidates genuinely vying to represent Battle River-Crowfoot. Bonnie Critchley, an Independent candidate who pitches herself as an alternative to Poilievre, voiced her frustration in an open letter to the Longest Ballot Committee. She highlighted a “backlash” among voters concerned about “fake out” candidates. “I don’t have a massive team, I don’t have backing from millions of people. I have to go door to door within my community and explain to my neighbours that I have nothing to do with you,” Critchley wrote, adding, “Please do not bury me with your ‘legal’ election interference.”
Michael Harris, the Libertarian Party candidate, echoed these sentiments, calling the protest a “mockery of the democratic process.” He stated, “This flood of joke candidates doesn’t just waste voters’ time. It actively hurts serious Independent and third-party candidates who are working hard to give this riding real alternatives.”
Nominations for candidates in Battle River-Crowfoot close on July 28, with a complete list of candidates expected on July 30. Voters will head to the polls on August 18, facing a ballot that many argue is less a demonstration of protest and more a deliberate act of democratic sabotage, apparently redesigned to target safe Conservative ridings and generate chaos.
