The B.C. government and the Opposition have released duelling narratives about a mental health facility that is at the heart of alleged voter irregularities in the October election.
Solicitor General Garry Begg’s response to a court petition says a BC Conservative operative was warned by police to stay away from Argyll Lodge in the riding of Surrey-Guildford, where the woman was gathering information about the election from residents who signed statements “they could neither read nor understand.”
Begg’s response says that despite the warning from Surrey RCMP, the woman succeeded in moving one resident out of the lodge in January.
Get breaking National news
The response that cites affidavits from lodge staff and the resident’s son says the man was later found by police in a state of “psychosis” after he was reported missing, and he remains hospitalized in a secure unit.
- Thousands of Calgary families facing a big jump in school bus fees next year
- Toronto piloting subway platform barriers, requires funding for full rollout
- Montreal’s anti-radicalization centre rebrands in response to shifting mandate
- Ottawa’s long-awaited AI strategy will be released next week, Carney says
The petition and affidavits are in response to BC Conservative accusations of election irregularities in Surrey-Guildford where Begg beat Conservative Honveer Singh Randhawa by 22 votes, giving the NDP a one-seat majority.
The Conservatives, meanwhile, are citing an affidavit by the Green candidate in the riding, Manjeet Singh Sahota, which says that when he tried to campaign at the facility a caregiver told him the residents do not vote.
The BC Green Party confirmed the existence of the affidavit, saying in a statement that the party will refrain from drawing conclusions until all evidence has been examined.
Conservative Leader John Rustad on Thursday renewed calls for a public inquiry about alleged voting irregularities at Argyll Lodge as he described Sahota’s affidavit.
Randhawa has asked the B.C. Supreme Court to declare Begg’s election invalid.
Comments
Want to discuss? Please read our Commenting Policy first.