TURMEL PRESS 1985 - 1986
Toronto Star Letter, Trevor Hancock
Last minute bill is unfair to small parties
A major disservice to democracy has been perpetrated in a sneaky and 
underhanded way. On the final day of this sitting, all three parties 
passed Bill 17 which changes candidate requirements. After little or 
no serious discussion or public scrutiny, it is now necessary for 
candidates to put up $200. For new small parties, this will mean 
spending $26,000 on deposits at an election and reduces our ability to 
get out word out. Perhaps that was their intent? Compounding this 
affront to democracy, neither the Greens nor the Libertarians who are 
registered were informed of the pending legislation. Is it normal 
practice to fail to notify organizations most affected by a piece of 
legislation or is this undemocratic approach solely reserved for 
political rivals?
850107Mo and 850118Th
Ottawa Citizen Letter, John Turmel
Stolen goods
Your Dec. 18, 1984 editorial titled "Debating politics beyond the 
fringe" is based on some unfortunate factual errors and unfair 
1) You stated that CJOH-TV "was simply applying the policy it has 
followed for the past decade, which stipulates that only candidates 
from parties that have elected members provincially or federally can 
participate. Other candidates are allowed to tape a one-minute 
That excuse by Max Keeping is false! I'm sure many people remember 
when I was on the live CJOH debate during the 1981 provincial general 
election and made Michael Cassidy back down from a $3000:1 bet. The 
Citizen chose to suppress how I had made fun of him that same evening 
during the St. John's church debate while Le Droit's coverage of me at 
that meeting took up a full quarter page. It was lucky for Cassidy 
since he won by only a few hundred votes. If the Citizen had printed 
the whole truth as did Le Droit, he might have lost and Mr. David 
Small would probably have won.
I had stressed at every single "all-candidates" meeting how I objected 
to the format of the upcoming CJOH debate because I had been invited 
to the debates in 1979, 1980, 1981 with all of the other major party 
candidates. Only since 1982 did Max Keeping decide to change the 
format from the fair, democratic "all-candidates" debate to a format 
where minor candidates were excluded.
Mr. Bird, Mr. Green, and Ms. Gigantes were aware that it was because I 
had gotten used to my fair share of the airtime pie that I had charged 
Mr. Keeping with illegally converting my share to the use of the other 
candidates in the 1983 Stormont-Dundas-Glengarry provincial by-
election. That motion was only reported by the Citizen once it had 
reached the Supreme Court of Canada in a Dec. 4, 1984 article titled 
"Two candidates seek rulings on TV debate" where it mentions that 
"Turmel tried to get Max Keeping charged with theft, breach of trust, 
and conspiracy for not letting him participate in a political debate 
broadcast by the station Dec. 6, 1983." The other candidates were also 
aware that I would be charging Max again if he cheated me again but 
this time I would also be charging any candidates who accepted my 
share of the airtime pie with having accepted stolen goods. I will be 
keeping the Citizen up to date when I charge Gigantes like I kept you 
up to date when I charged Keeping and it will be your choice to ignore 
the progress of this new legal action as you ignored the progress of 
the last one.
I'm sorry your reporters covering the all-candidates meetings never 
thought to mention that it was the contradiction between the old and 
the new CJOH formats which I was objecting to. Otherwise, you would 
have known that Keeping's statement was untrue. When I first read 
Keeping's reason in the Dec. 5, 1984 Jennifer Jackson article titled 
"Exclusion of 3 candidates sparks TV debate boycott", I telephoned her 
to point out that Keeping's excuse was not true. Knowing that the 
Citizen is a member of the Ontario Press Council and must correct 
factual errors when they are pointed out, I expected that the truth 
would come out. When it did not, I reasoned that she preferred to not 
embarrass Keeping by pointing out that he had lied, I telephoned the 
Citizen newsroom a second time. Again, Keeping's falsity was not 
corrected. It now seems that you have been a victim of your own 
paper's refusal to print the truth. Realizing that all candidates used 
to be treated fairly before Max took personal control of the debates, 
Mr. Bird and Mr. Green knew that his statement was false and acted 
2) You criticized Mr. Bird and Mr. Green for walking off the stage "at 
the last moment" in support of the minor candidates' democratic rights 
to equal treatment and called their action "grandstanding."
I think that is very unfair of you, especially after Jennifer Jackson 
mentioned that they were waiting for the results of two motions, one 
of them mine, for injunctions against exclusion of minor candidates 
which were heard in the Supreme Court of Ontario on the very afternoon 
of the debate. Unfortunately, when the presiding Justice did not give 
the minor candidates justice, it was up to the major candidates to 
give us justice and two out of three did. Even as the motion was being 
dismissed, I pointed out that in the long run, the final decision was 
not up to the courts nor the stations. When the candidates object to 
unfair rules and refuse to play, there is no game. The judge must have 
been shocked to have that happen that very night. That Gigantes chose 
to stay and score all her points on an empty net is an empty victory. 
A farce. Max Keeping ran Ontario's first and only "one-candidate" 
debate and Gigantes was the candidate in Ontario's one and only "one-
candidate" debate, to her everlasting shame!
3) You say that if CJOH wants to exclude minor candidates, that is its 
judgment to make. Not in a democratic nations. I pointed out to the 
other candidates that in France, all candidates had to be treated 
equally (App. A). I also pointed out that in England, "a candidate 
cannot take part in a program if any of his rivals neither takes part 
nor consents to its taking place" (App. B). You don't seem to care 
whether or not Max Keeping's decision was democratic or not. 
Evidently, Mr. Bird and Mr. Green did, Gigantes did not.
That you don't care if it is right and democratic to exclude some 
candidates is not very smart. It may not have dawned on you that the 
reason democracy is optimal is that all ideas get an equal chance of 
airing. The winner may even learn something from the losers! The one 
thing one can be sure of is that after years of having members in 
federal and provincial Parliaments, the Big Three parties do not have 
any major answers to economic problems. The wish to restrict coverage 
to only parties that have no answers is an unmistakable sign of 
intellectual inferiority. You must be in agreement with CJSB's Ed 
Needham who broadcast an open-line show he titled "Are fringe 
candidates polluting the elections?" You and he would probably feel 
much more comfortable with purity of the "one-candidate" debates in 
communist systems where there are no fringe candidates to pollute 
their elections.
4) Finally, you unfairly implied that Mr. Green and Mr. Bird were 
hypocritical to accept coverage by the Citizen which you admitted was 
biased in their favour and to take part in a CHEZ-Radio debate where 
the minor candidates were given less time in another time slot.
Candidates have no direct control over what newspapers do with 
interviews but they do have control over how the electronic media 
covers them. I agree with you when you point out that you have always 
biased election coverage in favour of the major candidates but you 
only get away with such undemocratic prejudicing of electoral odds 
because there is no regulation forcing you to be fair and equitable to 
all rival candidates. This is not so with the electronic media. 
Section 9(1) of the CRTC's Television Broadcasting Regulations states 
that free time broadcasts must be allocated "on an equitable basis to 
all parties and rival candidates". Unfortunately, Max Keeping decided 
that he wanted to control what the voters get to hear just as you 
control what the voters get to read. Though you can get away with it 
because there is no similar restriction on you to be fair and for that 
reason I have never launched a legal attack against you for your 
undemocratic and inequitable treatment of me, you must be aware I have 
always launched legal attacks against television stations for their 
undemocratic and inequitable treatment of candidates precisely because 
the CRTC regulation exists. I don't believe that the fact that you 
always prejudice your coverage is any reason that they should accept 
it when Max Keeping tries to prejudice his coverage.
With respect to the CHEZ debate, I'd bet they took part without giving 
much thought to format. I'd point out that once the issue was raised 
at the very first candidates' meeting where the organizers were not 
going to allow the minor candidates to take part, they did the 
honourable thing. I asked Gigantes if she would support my right to 
participate. She refused outright. I asked both Mr. Bird and Mr. 
Green. They did and the organizers backed down. I and Greg Vezina did 
participate. From the start, Mr. Green and Mr. Bird supported full 
candidate participation and Gigantes did not. I feel that because they 
may have taken part in a debate before the issue was raised is a weak 
criticism on your part. Their actions from the very first time I asked 
for their support are what really count.
I believe that since your criticism was based on falsities and 
ignorance of democratic principles, you owe both Mr. Green and Mr. 
Bird an apology. Before you look to find a straw in their eyes, you 
should check out the log in yours! I appreciate the actions of those 
honourable gentlemen and feel very sorry that Gigantes dishonourably 
benefited from her undemocratic behaviour which I promised her I would 
henceforth call "cheating."
I insist that you correct Mr. Keeping's lie now that it has been 
pointed out to you or I will again resort to the Ontario Press 
Council. I do not make such undertakings lightly but, as you will no 
doubt remember, when I last to appeal to the Quebec Court of Appeal 
but there's a minor problem. So far they don't seem to realize that 
they moved too soon and if I file an appeal, the judge might find out 
and not hand down his decision. The judge who heard the opposition's 
two week early motion for final judgment still hasn't handed down his 
decision yet. It's forcing me to delay the leave application till the 
very last day.
Finally, you unfairly implied that Mr. Green and Mr. Bird were 
hypocritical to accept coverage by The Citizen which you admitted was 
biased in their favor. Candidates have no control over what newspapers 
do with interviews but they do have control over how the electronic 
media covers them.
Ottawa Citizen Letter, Locky Beckstead
Listen to views of all candidates
CJOH should change its policy. I'm sure this is why Messrs. Green and 
Bird boycotted the debate. They were trying to communicate to CJOH 
that neither it nor any other news agency should assume that 
candidates who run independently or for minority parties are not 
worthy of equal time. If I did not wish to hear the views of "fringe" 
candidates, I would not watch the debate period. That's why I oppose 
CJOH's idea of limiting their speeches to 1 minute.
Ottawa Citizen, Peter Calamai
Supreme Court aims to reduce trivial appeals
The SCC wants to become more accessible by stopping every Tom, Dick 
and Harriet from walking into the courtroom with a potential appeal. 
It has asked John Crosbie to tighten up the procedure for getting a 
case before the court, Chief Justice Brian Dickson said. Gone would be 
everyone's existing right to a 15 minutes oral argument about why his 
case is important enough to go to the full nine-judge court. The 
personal appearance by an individual or his lawyer is guaranteed when 
appeals are finished in lower courts and after the necessary written 
material is filed in Ottawa. Instead, oral hearings would be limited 
to borderline cases. Trivial issues and obviously important disputes 
would be rejected or accepted on written arguments alone. "The court 
feels it's a move in the right direction to make the court more 
accessible by making it more economical" said Dickson. He said the 
current practice of guaranteed oral hearings on all applications is 
very expensive, especially of judges' time. The court is likely to 
hear 600 such applications this year but approve no more than 110 for 
full hearing. Justice Willard Estey said the public should be 
consulted before a change is made. "The right to be heard is pretty 
fundamental." Dickson said the Supreme Court intends to continue being 
generous in granting persons the right to be heard. "I would want to 
be the last to close the door to anyone who wants to have access to 
this court." (as he tried to close the door.)
Ottawa Focus Magazine, Randy Cantera
Political preservation
Caricature of me with a beggar's cup for votes saying "Won't you 
please donate your vote today? Yes. With your single vote, you could 
keep a rare political animal from extinction. 
John Turmel is a political animal on the endangered list. Like the 
once plentiful Grit (partia naturalium governicus) there are not many 
John Turmels out there in the Canadian political bush. And, more 
likely than not, what's left of the species will disappear by the end 
of the century. Needless to say, its' death will only be acknowledged 
by the minute cult of die-hard devotees who may well be shedding its 
tears from behind mental institution walls. 
Turmel is a local ideological dynamo who, for the past 5 years, had 
dedicated his life to 3 things: the Greenback system, court cases and 
professional gambling. All 3 are interchangeable in status; one would 
be unnecessary without the other. The Greenback system is what the 33-
year-old Turmel has stumped for in close to 20 campaigns in all three 
political arenas. Touted as a cure-all for our nation's ailments, this 
simplistic, unorthodox economic program would outlaw interest rates 
and have citizens pay their taxes by working for the state or city. 
For his pains, Everyman would be give tradeable tax credit notes. In 
spite of the seemingly bottomless reservoir of passion and persuasion 
he discharges through his speeches and face-to-ace discussions, his 
ballot support has yet to break the 2,000 mark. The Carleton 
University alumnus, whose insignia is "The Engineer" has a high sense 
of indignation. Whenever said sense is triggered, he doesn't merely 
complain. He instead uses every legal and communicative outlet 
available to redress the problem. Whether it be an irate letter to the 
editor, a fiery lawsuit or a public denunciation, Turmel never allows 
his opponents the luxury of forgetting about him.
For instance, it would be hard to picture Turmel being on the 
Christmas card list of CJOH news director Max Keeping. Especially 
after Turmel christened the anchorman as "Ottawa's very own Ted 
Baxter. Keeping had prevented the independent candidate from 
participating in a CJOH television debate during the recent Ottawa 
Centre by-election. It would be just as unlikely to find a soft spot 
in the heart of Russ Mills for Turmel. Particularly in light of a 
recent lawsuit Turmel brought against the Citizen for character 
defamation focusing on an editorial which commented on the plaintiff's 
alleged disruption of a Green Party nomination meeting. And you would 
have to be in the Twilight Zone if you were greeted with the sight of 
Turmel and Ottawa Centre MPP Michael Cassidy toasting one another over 
a quiet lunch for two. Unless Cassidy had forgotten the challenge 
Turmel flung in his face during a 1981 provincial election. Raising 
the odds at 3,000 to 1, Turmel defied Cassidy to prove to him that his 
economic theories were unsound. Cassidy declined the offer. But Turmel 
hounded the incumbent throughout the campaign chiding him for being 
There have been many other equally newsworthy incidents and lawsuits 
initiated by the electrical engineering graduate. As can be imagined, 
multiple court cases can a strain on one's income while elections 
campaigns are known to be monopolizers of one's schedule. 
Consequently, Turmel had a trade which has proved most compatible with 
his peculiar life-style. As a free-lance player of cards and dice, 
Turmel manages to keep his pockets lined through fly-by-night 
competitive encounters with like-minded individuals. 
Reading the previous paragraphs draws one to this conclusion: 
everything about this highly persistent seeker of majority approval is 
clearly out of whack with the present political atmosphere. This may 
explain why Turmel has always campaigned as an independent and why he 
is looked upon as a water-headed loon by a good number of 
constituents. Perhaps a century ago, Turmel's efforts would have 
reaped more encouraging results. Canadian were more receptive to 
politicians with visions, however myopic. Such individuals were 
headstrong and confrontational by nature which was fine for the times 
as well compatible with the dominant medium of the day: public 
speaking. In the BM, (Before Microphones) era, a public office 
applicant projected his thoughts and emotions in a volume with an 
expressiveness which would seem ludicrous, if not down-right scary in 
today's electronic age. Anyone who has seen John Turmel behind the 
podium can confirm this. The hard-hat wearing political gadfly is a 
sideshow of fervid declarations and ferris wheel body language. He 
doesn't need a microphone, what he needs is a nineteenth century 
constituency. His is a vaudeville act hopelessly marooned in 
television society. 
The theme song wailed among unsuccessful politicians and their 
flustered supporters is built around the refrain "substance should 
count more than image" (which now can be heard within the John Turner 
camp.) ...
Television has slowly changed the electorate into "cool" constituents. 
As such, we are leery of candidates who don't look telegenic and can't 
ooze aural vapor at the drop of a floor director's hand. They have one 
vision; that of the polls. They do not court controversy; they defuse 
it. They operate on the maxim "the circumstances dictate the 
principle." To paraphrase our Prime Minister, there's no whore like a 
successful whore.
John Turmel is many things, but he's no whore. Whores are pragmatic, 
crafty and know the game well enough not to tamper with it. Turmel not 
only tries to tamper, he does his damnedest to bludgeon it. He has no 
hope of succeeding. People are creatures of habit and for many of us, 
voting for one of the three major parties is one of those habits. 
Acknowledging other candidates would only clutter things up. In the 
face of such apathy, Turmel continues to hammer his theme into the 
local subconscious. Regarded by many as the political village idiot, 
he snarls and gropes for recognition. In return, he receives notoriety 
when he's lucky, cold shoulders when he's not. If Turmel is as 
intelligent as he purports to be, he would realize just how much of a 
square peg he is in the circle game. Visionaries make for great 
religious revivals but as far as a career in modern Canadian politics 
goes, they are much of a handicap as would be a speech impediment.
I nurse no pretensions of being an economist. So whether or not the 
Greenback system is so much shaman babbling is a question I won't 
address. Turmel's right to equal time in terms of media coverage and 
participation in any and all debates, however, is one I will support. 
Turmel should be allowed to say his sales pitch and given the exact 
amount of opportunities as his opponents, be they mainstream or 
otherwise. Democracy should be at its most ideal form during an 
election. With the exception of violent racists, there should be room 
for everyone willing to invest the time and money to conduct a 
campaign. As far as I know, there's no law against variety, nor should 
there be; we would certainly be the worst for it. Meantime, people 
should watch and listen to John Turmel very closely. He's an oddity 
and worthy of attention -- if only for the memories to be had. Years 
from now, stories about the John Turmels in our lives will wow 
grandchildren and historians the world over.
Ottawa Citizen
RCMP probing complaints of improper voting conduct
The RCMP is investigating complaints of improper conduct during the 
federal election where two people were disorderly at an all-candidates 
meeting during the campaign. 
This is not a complaint against Gauvin but one laid against me by 
Trevor Hancock. Sgt. Lafleur of the RCMP recently requested a 
statement from me about the Beaches incident. I'm preparing the Ed 
Needham show and the excerpts I have on the meeting on tape for him 
with a memorandum. I could state the facts, how I objected to being 
removed and argued how Hancock wanted to answer the question too but 
didn't have the guts to stand up and insist when his rights were 
infringed upon. Either the moderator had the right to control 
questions and have me evicted or I had the right to answer and not be 
evicted. If I have the right, I want it stated by the Justice 
Department. If I didn't, I did disrupt and I should be prosecuted. If 
I'm not charged, I want the report to state that the moderator erred. 
If I erred, I must be charged. So either report the my right was 
violated or charge me and let me argue it before a court.
Ottawa Citizen, Bruce Ward
The Rae campaign was dogged by fringe candidate John Turmel throughout 
the day. Turmel, a familiar sight on Parliament Hill with his picket 
sign and white hard hat, waved a wad of $100 bills at television 
cameras and challenged Rae to wager on the outcome of the debate. In 
Hamilton, a shoving match developed when an NDP campaigner stepped in 
front of Turmel.
Ottawa Citizen, Jacquie Miller
TV stations may be treating Green Party unfairly: CRTC
Television stations CJOH and CBOT may not be giving a fair amount of 
coverage to the Green party and its Ottawa West candidate in the 
provincial election, says the federal agency that regulates 
television. But the CRTC won't make a firm ruling on the issue until 
after Thursday's election. CRTC Secretary-General Fernand Belisle sent 
a telegram Tuesday to CBOT, CJOH and candidate Greg Vezina saying 
there is a "reasonable possibility" the stations aren't treating the 
party fairly. However, Belisle gave no reason why the commission won't 
rule quickly on Vezina's complaints that he was barred from political 
debates at both stations and couldn't make a free-time political 
broadcast at CBOT. (Won't say why until pie is eaten)
In the telegram, Belisle reminded the stations of the obligations 
under CRTC regulations to give time "on an equitable basis to all 
parties and rival candidates." However, the word "equitable" is open 
to interpretation by the commission, said CRTC official Pierre 
Pontbriand. Vezina said the telegram is "crystal clear notice that 
they are treading on thin ice." 
The Green party, which concentrates on disarmament and environmental 
issues, will remain a fringe party if the media continue to brand it 
one, he says. Lionel Lumb, executive producer of CBOT's Newsday, said 
the stations has been fair to Vezina. Green party views have been 
included in several news stories aired during the campaign. But only 
candidates from the three major parties were invited to participate in 
the CBC station's 14 minute debates for each of eight local ridings. 
While fringe candidates weren't given equal time, they were given 
equitable coverage over the course of the campaign. The CBC also 
offered free-time political broadcasts only to the three major 
parties. CJOH station manager Al MacKay said his lawyers are trying to 
figure out the meaning of the CRTC telegram. In this election, CJOH 
isn't running debates for each local riding, as it has in the past. 
Instead, the station aired two half-hour debates on election issues 
but only invited representatives from the three major parties because 
of the increasing number of independent candidates. (or decreasing)
Ottawa Citizen, Kelly Egan
The gloves come off in Ottawa Centre race
Think of the December election in Ottawa Centre as low-key and 
sometimes spirited series of skirmishes. By comparison, the flavor of 
this campaign could be considered a bare-fisted brawl. 
Only five months after a by-election race that easily sent NDP MPP 
Evelyn Gigantes to Queen's Park, much of the civility that marked that 
first campaign has vanished. After firing scathing press releases at 
each other, the parties say they're going to far as to seek legal 
advice on the matter.
Independent candidate John Turmel is getting into the act, stooping so 
low as to liken Gigantes to a prostitute because she appeared alone on 
a television debate while the other main candidates boycotted the 
debate in the December run-off. She placed 2,295 votes ahead of Bird 
and 2,963 ahead of Green in December. This time, the NDP justice 
critic is facing Bird, Liberal newcomer Pat Legris and Turmel.
Ottawa Citizen, Charles Gordon
Bigger, better than the news itself, news machine makes things happen
No one has ever seen the man -- or it may be a woman -- who runs the 
News Machine. This man or woman, if he or she exists, has immense 
power. If the man or woman does not exist, the Machine itself has 
immense power. It is better not to think about that.
The News Machine cranks into it highest gear for the big news events 
of the day: the leaders' debate, the leadership convention, the 
federal budget, the birth of sextuplets, the tasting of the Beaujolais 
nouveau. When the News Machine is in high gear, everything in its path 
must fall.
The News machine is more powerful than the news. It tells the news 
when to happen. It tells the news not to happen during the hockey 
game. The news has no choice but to agree. 
For weeks before the news happens, the News Machine pounds out the 
news that the news is going to happen. It interviews everybody in 
sight about what the news is going to be, then interviews everyone 
again about to comment on what might be the implications of what the 
news might be when the news happens. 
When the news actually happens, the News Machine only quickens the 
pace. No one is safe. In the federal budget, politicians and officials 
are scrummed within an inch of their lives. No one with the tiniest 
amount of expertise can hide from the News Machine.
Toronto Star
Picture of me with my sign "Bob Rae favors excluding minor candidates 
from election debates" behind others with a sign "Will the next 
premier of Ont. please stand up?" 
CONFUSED VOTERS: A group of protesters outside the Legislature 
yesterday indicate their concern about who really is running the 
province. The New Democrats have made a pact with the Liberals to 
defeat Premier Frank Miller at the end of the Throne Speech.
Ottawa Citizen, Parliamentary Notebook
The official report of Chief Electoral Officer Jean-Marc Hamel on the 
1984 election states that Mulroney described himself as "lawyer and 
statesman," Sinclair Stevens and John Turner as "Queen's Counsel," Joe 
Clark as "university lecturer," John C. Turmel as "banking systems 
engineer" and his brother Ray as "bankfighter."
Ottawa Citizen, Charles Lynch
Lynch later said he though the success of the Speaker's Corner will 
depend on how spontaneous it becomes. "They got lucky today and there 
was a spontaneous outburst. Otherwise, the crowd was too quiet." He 
added that "If there can be the kind of life that was provided by the 
one dissenter (Charette), it will act as a focus and it will pull the 
nuts and bolts and ... the loony tunes off the Hill. I've always been 
uneasy about the Hill being the main place for demonstrations and 
Ottawa Citizen Editorial cartoon, King
A voter wearing a set of optical lenses with a Network News Man 
sitting on top of his head holding reins controlling where he can look 
while looking at the ratings chart. Wonderful!
CBOT-TV, Peter Lockyer
Peter's People: John Turmel profile.
Shot in front of the Bank of Canada, at the Exhibition, at an 
accordion concerts at Vincent Massey park. 
Ian Parker: "Love him or hate him, John Turmel is one of the most 
colorful characters this city can boast. Peter introduces you to the 
John Turmel you never knew." 
Le Droit
Cheques des assistes sociaux
Two of the creditiste candidates took advantage of the debate at 
Ottawa City Hall yesterday to announce the creation of the network of 
small businesses who will cash, without commission, the cheques of 
people on social assistance. John Turmel is running against Ben 
Franklin and Walter McPhee is running for Ottawa mayor. For several 
days, the creditiste candidates have taken on the establishments who 
discount the social assistance cheques.
CBO-RADIO, Michael  Sourial
Money Marts
Nancy: There were picket signs and protesters outside Ottawa's two 
Money Mart stores yesterday. Money Mart is the check-cashing service 
that cashes almost any check, from almost anybody, for a six percent 
fee. Little ID is needed and above all, Money Mart will cash a post-
dated check at any time. The protesters, led by Ottawa's John Turmel, 
say Money Mart preys on the poor, people who need their welfare and 
their UIC benefits before the date on the check. Mr. Turmel has been 
organizing a network of local businesses who will provide the same 
services as Money Mart, for free. Michael Sourial has more on the 
Sourial: Morning to you, Nancy. John Turmel argues the customers of 
Money Mart are people who can't get bank accounts or VISA cards, or 
any credit. He says they don't go there out of choice and he is most 
upset with the post-dated check business that Money Mart does. Right 
now, today for example, welfare checks are arriving across Ottawa but 
they're dated for this Friday, the first of November. The only place 
that will cash them before then is Money Mart. "Unfair" says Mr. 
Turmel: "They are taking away from the poorest of the poor, the people 
who are so desperate, they can't wait a few days to cash their check. 
I don't object to any of their other enterprises, you know, 
transferring money, doing bills, hydro bills, but unfortunately, they 
are taking money away from the poorest of the people and we've just 
provided an alternative. These businesses don't get interest on their 
money so they don't mind taking the checks and we've organized them. 
Any group of people with an ID system in any town could help their 
poor by basically doing this.
MM's Steve Clark: The man, who as a very poor reputation for unfounded 
speculation, obviously, he's motivated by political aspiration ... If 
John Turmel was sincere about his cause and perceived that there was a 
real problem, I ask "Why did he not contact us to discuss and clarify 
the issue?"
Sourial: That's Steve Clark, the spokesman for Money Mart in Victoria. 
No one in Ottawa would be interviewed. Mr. Clark says it's a matter of 
choice, that Money Mart doesn't cater to the desperate but rather 
provides a decent and fair service.
Steve Clark: I'll give you an example. The guy is off work. He goes 
home, gets a call from a friend, okay, a buddy from work. He gets a 
phone call that says "Look, let's go out tonight. Such and such and 
such are in town. Let's go see them." The guy says "Well, no. I can't. 
I don't have any money." The other end of the phone says "Gee, well 
you've got your pay check. You'll have enough money and we can all go 
out." That' a typical example of a customer.
Turmel: Rich now, they have no other alternative, right? If a welfare 
mother happens, due to an emergency, to need the money today and not 
in three days, she's forced to come. And I've cashed checks for two 
women who said "That's exactly my situation. I just had to get it 
cashed today and I couldn't wait." So there are some people out there 
who are not coming here so they can get beer money. They're coming 
here because they need it right now, and they're the ones we are going 
to help.
Sourial: The basic defence Money Mart makes is that it's a free 
country here and that they don't force anyone to use their business. 
But "why would anyone have six percent deducted off their check," I 
asked "who could have it cashed for nothing at a bank? Their answer is 
"It's more convenient at Money Mart, that's why people pay the six 
percent, they say. But with banking machines, later banking hours, and 
even credit cards, I put it to Mr. Clark that it's only post-dated 
check cashing that sets Money Mart apart. He maintained "No, it's a 
Steve Clark: It's difficult to maintain a personal bank account, for 
Sourial: How is it? What's the difficulty.
Steve Clark: The difficulty in maintaining a personal bank account? 
Well, again, it's choice. These people have a choice. They choose to 
pay for their needs in cash.
Sourial: But this is the point Mr. Turmel is making, is that they 
don't have a choice. That they have been forced to go over to your 
Money Mart system. This is why I'm asking you. You're telling me that 
they're coming over because it is difficult to maintain a bank 
account. I'm saying "What's the difficulty? Specifically?"
Steve Clark: In other words, it's not a difficulty. They do it by 
choice. It's easier to purchase your items with cash than with check. 
We're open 12 hours a day including most holidays and immediately walk 
up, cash their checks in a matter of minutes and be able to leave with 
that cash. 
Sourial: True for any banking machine, Mr. Clark, so again, I'll ask 
"What's the difference other than post-dated checks?"
Steve Clark: The people ... really ... I mean, you have to ask 
yourself ... I don't understand why you keep asking the same question.
Sourial: Mr. Clark would not name any service that Money Mart offers 
that banks don't, except for post-dated check cashing and that's John 
Turmel's main target. Mr. Turmel has convinced 16 local businesses to 
participate and cash post-dated checks. The two businesses we called 
from his list confirmed their willingness to compete with Money Mart 
say and at no charge to the customer. The picketers outside Money Mart 
say they are also interested in helping the poor who can't get 
services from banks by giving them an alternative to Money Mart.
Protester: We want to help the people that the Money Mart is charging 
six percent off of each dollar. There was one lady that come down and 
she had a seven hundred dollar check and they were going to charge her 
forty dollars to cash it. So she came down to the Social Credit Party 
and they cashed it for nothing. And I say it is the poor people. She 
had a little sick child with her at the time.
Steve Clark: If you are telling me people on Social Assistance are 
using our convenience service because they are running out of money 
each month, then your problem is not with Money Mart, okay. You should 
look at your social assistance programs. Are you educating your 
recipients on sound personal monthly management?
Sourial: John Turmel say's he's already cut into Money Mart's business 
by about ten thousand dollars. This week will be a busy one since 
checks are already arriving, checks no one will cash until November 
first, except Money Mart. If you go to a Money Mart in the next couple 
of days, you will be offered, outside, by John Turmel and his people, 
the choice of having your check cashed for free at one of 16 
participating local businesses and that is without losing the six 
Nancy: Will they cash those checks without you making a purchase?
Sourial: They will, as long as you have the correct identification 
which John Turmel is handing out.
Nancy: Michael Sourial, thank you.
Money Mart Report Turmel complaint 
Dear Sir:
In the Nov. 1, 1985 NEWSDAY report on the Money Mart check-cashing 
operations,  I find it hard to believe that your reporter could have 
failed to note Social Credit Party of Ontario members who were 
picketing the Ottawa Money Marts she was reporting on. No mention was 
made that over 100 people had been diverted from the Money Marts to 
sources who would cash those checks for free.  She found a spokesman 
to castigate them from an organization with similar views though not 
even associated with the protest that was taking place.  In essence, 
she found herself a non-picketer opposition spokesman after by-passing 
the picketers to interview the picketees.
She erroneously minimized the actual percent Money Marts take from 
repeat victims.  She told the poor the minimum they would lose was 3%.  
It is actually 3 & 3/4%.  Three quarters of a percent may not mean 
much to most people but is a great deal to those who are forced to 
resort to these services out of financial desperation.  On a $700 
Family Benefits check at the 3% reported minimum charge, a needy 
family would expect to only lose $21.  At the true 3&3/4% rate, the 
needy family would actually lose $26.25, $5.25 more than her story 
indicated.  She certainly did not stress how a whopping 6% would be 
taken out of the check, $42.00 if the check were being cashed for the 
first time!  Since government checks came out one day before they 
could be negotiated this month, even with simple interest, calculate 
for yourself how much these interest rates for one day amount to on a 
yearly basis to appreciate the burden imposed on the poor.  While I 
feel they prey on the poor, your reporter preferred to call it 
catering to the demand. 
At the end of the story, she casually mentioned that John Turmel's 
Social Credit Party of Ontario and 16 Ottawa FOSTER MERCHANTS had 
implemented a cure but there was a hitch.  The ID cards were issued 
under the auspices of the Social Credit Party of Ontario.  Whose name 
would she suggest be on the card if not the name of the political 
party which is guaranteeing the checks to the participating merchants. 
What good is an ID card if issued under no auspices?  Since no other 
organization has undertaken anything at all to help,  I feel that it 
is unfair to imply that having one's identification certified by a 
political party which happens to be the only group addressing an 
ignored need is a hitch.   What if one of the other established 
political political parties had done the same thing while 
Parliamentarians scratched their heads over the matter, would it have 
been labelled a hitch?  I submit that such a label is unfair when the 
alternative is to remain without good ID.  I hope her report has not 
dissuaded any people from taking advantage of our remedial source of 
free photo identification and check cashing.  
The greatest advantage of organizing such aid to the poor through a 
political party is that government subsidies will be available.    We 
do provide a quite expensive identification card for free and we hope 
to have these expenditures subsidized once we are registered.  There 
are too many advantages in helping the poor by doing it under the 
auspices of a political party registered in Ontario.  If your reporter 
can find any improper or malevolent motives in my use of a political 
party to further the aims described or suggest alternative and more 
acceptable auspices than a political party, I would certainly like to 
hear it.  
I would point out that the fact that only CBO radio's Michael Sourial 
informed his listeners that our group was intercepting people who were 
desperate enough to be going to the Money Marts and sending them to 
check cashing sources.  Enclosed is a recording of his report.  
We cashed almost $38,000 in checks in 3 days and still have many 
merchants with money left.  But the other members of the media did not 
inform on what we were doing and directly prolonged the agony by 
suppressing information of the cure.  That means that all those who 
suffered out the waiting period till the check could be cleared in 
deprivation suffered needlessly.  Had they been informed of our 
services, the problem would have been solved for many more.
I'll be sure to have people who suffered so call their favorite radio 
and television stations and newspapers and ask why they never informed 
them that Turmel and McPhee would have cashed checks for free at City 
Sincerely yours,
John C. Turmel
3 & 3/4% interest for 1 day compounded at simple interest for one year 
is: = 3 & 3/4%  X 365 days = 1368.75% 
Ottawa Herald 
A look at the fringes
The world is moving fast. It's the era of the 30-second clip. At 
election time, candidates are sized up and sorted out in the wink of a 
camera's eye or the flick of a steno pad. Those assessed as "not 
serious" are shunted to the fringes of the electoral respectability. 
And in the process, we lost sight of that fragile thing called 
democracy. Ignoring fringe candidates makes them angry. "Who are you 
to decide which people are worth voting for?" they ask the media and 
organizers of public forums. They're right. Even the simple allotment 
of time and space to particular candidates has its own built-in 
editorial judgment that journalists and organizers must constantly be 
wary of. As for writing people off because they have no chance of 
winning -- that's smug and small-minded.
In the race for the Ottawa mayoralty, Catterall and Durrell are the 
heavyweights. But, there are five people running for mayor -- not two. 
They run the gamut of the types of people racing "on the fringes " of 
an election. Walter McPhee is associated with the Turmels, perennial 
candidates in the Ottawa area. Allan Jones is a retired businessman. 
He had to close his business in 1979 because the street where it was 
located was shut down for construction by the city. He's basically 
running because of that one issue. Nabil Fawzy recently filed an 
application to prohibit the Board of Trade from moderating candidates' 
meetings sponsored by the city which was dismissed on technicalities. 
Fawzy was upset at being excluded from public forums. 
This is happening more and more. It shouldn't. We may not like what 
some of these candidates say but we should -- and we must -- defend 
their right to say it. 
Ottawa Herald, Susan Sherring
Political outsiders and crusaders always surface at election time -- 
along with the inevitable debates about democracy. How to treat these 
so-called "fringe candidates" is a touchy issue.
It may come as surprise to Ottawa electors to learn there are five 
candidates running for mayor. However, just two, Catterall and Durrell 
have received the lion's share of media attention and interest by 
private organizations during this municipal campaign. They have been 
referred to as the major opponents or main contenders. The other three 
have been coined fringe candidates.
Walter McPhee is running under the Social Credit banner and is 
supported by perennial candidate John Turmel. Two central issues 
emerge. First of all, who, if anyone, has the right to determine which 
candidates are on the fringe? And secondly, do organizations or the 
media have the right to favor coverage to certain candidates? In 
recent history, the issue of fringe candidates has been revived every 
time there's an election. 
Caroline Andrew, a municipal affairs professor at Ottawa U. said the 
issue is a complicated one and can't be solved by just giving all 
candidates equal press or invitations to speak. (And she teaches our 
youth?) "The so-called fringe candidates can spoil debate if they are 
given absolutely equal time because some are running on marginal 
issues and this poses a problem to electors. TV has often taped 
interviews with fringe candidates while the major opponents are given 
more air time. This is somewhat of a solution but still points out 
which ones are marginal. But it is not a role of the media to decide 
which are major and which issues are minor, but the media is obliged 
to decide. That's the problem. It's not up to any of us to exclude 
ideas. The problem is how to have a system that has all the ideas yet 
try in some way to reflect ideas from the public. For example, John 
Turmel and Social Credit deform the real issues. The media is so 
important that any kind of judgment is a choice. The media is becoming 
an actor in the political process, not a participant," Andrew 
An interesting case is that of Stephen Clark, 26, the mayor of 
Brockville. Then, the 22-year-old unemployed fine arts graduate 
decided to run for mayor. It is safe to assume that had he run in 
Ottawa, he would have been considered a fringe candidate. However, in 
Brockville, he was given equal treatment and won. Clark said he feels 
it is only fair for all candidates to be given equal treatment. "How 
can you call it an all-candidates' meeting if not everyone can attend? 
Maybe in Ottawa it's different, but here everyone is given a fair 
chance. The way the system is written, there is certain criteria for 
running and it says nothing about what a candidate's platform is. I 
sympathize with them. Maybe there's a difference between the way you 
do things there, but here all people are invited. I think that's fair, 
Clark said.
In one instance, the Ottawa Board of Trade held a mayoralty debate and 
invited only the two "front-runners" to attend. The other candidates 
protested. Michael Church said the board voted to have just two at 
their meeting. "It's not different then if you had a meeting in your 
own home. (Media invited?) I believe everyone should have access to 
the election but they should consider the office that they are running 
for. They should have to pay their dues. (They all did unless he means 
special requirements set privately by him and his back-room cronies) 
I'd like to see them have to post a bond. (Make sure a poor man never 
gets in their way) If they got between 6 and 10% of the vote, they'd 
get the bond back with interest. That way, they'd think twice before 
running without public support. If they had support, the people would 
be willing to put the money forward," Church suggested. 
With no easy solution in sight, the debate continues. This week, 
Catterall and Durrell were invited to attend a live debate with Max 
Keeping on CJOH. The other three were given the chance to do a one 
minute taped interview which they turned down. (Not true) The trio has 
suggested that Keeping has killed democracy with Jones claiming the 
sacrifices he made fighting for democracy in the Second World War were 
in vain. Andrew points out democracy is the will of the people to 
choose and said democracy is not at stake. "If you ignore them, you 
bias judgment. On the other hand, if you accord them too much 
attention, you also bias judgment. (What about equal?) It's a real 
sticky situation with no way to win and it's very difficult to come to 
terms with. For the media, it is a really hard problem and there is no 
way to be fair." 
Carleton University Charlatan, S. D. Goldstein
Money Mart: No cheques for free, inaccessibility leaves last resort 
Money Marts are exploiting the very people who can least afford it.
Some of the people grumble as they are handed their money -- less 
three of six per cent -- depending on whether this is their first 
visit to the Money Mart.
"My cheque came and it's dated for the first of this month," says an 
elderly woman. I have nothing the house to feed my grandchildren and 
the bank wouldn't cash my cheque, because I don't got no ID and I 
don't got enough money to keep an account." This is the same situation 
faced every month by some of Canada's two million welfare recipients. 
Banks will not cash post-dated cheques nor will they cash a cheque 
from someone who does not hold an account with them. Opening an 
account requires identification low-income earners cannot afford such 
as a $56 driver's licence or major credit card. By the time the 
month's cheque comes, these people nee the money immediately. They 
have no choice but to go to a company like Money Mart where a portion 
of their cheque is used as payment.
"These people are exploiting the very people who can least afford it" 
said Debbie Hugh-Geoffrion, a worker for the Ottawa-based National 
Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO). She balks at the thought of them 
being a service. "They are nothing but a rip-off."
Clark refused comment on that allegation saying they only grant 
interviews to "well-known" news organizations. He said questions 
submitted in writing will be looked over and a response will be sent 
out. "That's what he told me too," said Michael Jenson who wrote an 
article on them for Toronto's NOW magazine last spring. To date, 
Jenson has not even received a letter of acknowledgment.
The banks would seem to be the obvious place to cash a cheque but this 
solution proves the most difficult because the Bank Act clearly states 
that banks are prohibited from charging surcharges on government 
cheques. "When you go into a bank, they make you feel like a criminal" 
says Bertha Billings, an Ottawa welfare recipient. "They wouldn't 
accept my cheque because I didn't have enough ID." Billings is not 
alone in her anguish. Patrons leaving the Money Mart expressed their 
distaste for financial institutions. "I'm just getting back on my feet 
and I can't afford a bank account right now," says a young man. He 
tried opening a bank account but the bank wanted to hold the funds for 
10 days to make sure it was not bogus. "It's a big racket," Billings 
growls, "the banks and the Money Mart pick the poor like we're ripe 
strawberries in a field." 
The fledgling Social Credit Party of Ontario is organizing a network 
of small businesses to agree to cash cheques on presentation of a 
special card. The Social Credit party offers to cover any fraudulent 
cheques. Money Mart's Caouette says he doesn't care. "They can do 
whatever they like. The only problem I see is if they get people to 
sign their petition." He is referring to the 10,000 signatures needed 
before a political association can become a recognized political party 
in Ontario. 
Hugh-Geoffrion likes the idea but doesn't like the way the Social 
Credit Party is going about it. "From what I've heard, the card people 
get is a Social Credit membership card and people have to buy things 
in the participating stores." (Both not true.)
Ottawa Herald , Mike Hayes, News editor
The `One For The Road Award' -- To perennial fringe candidate John 
Turmel who took on the Ben Franklin for Mayor Forever Committee in 
Nepean. Turmel, part-time professional gambler, part-time engineer and 
full-time eccentric who is nothing else, is colorful, was buried by 
the Franklin machine. In losing his 20th attempt to gain a political 
position, Turmel is fast closing in on American comedian (and 
presidential hopeful) Pat Paulsen's all-time record for futility.
Nepean Clarion
Defeated candidates' comments
TURMEL: I do not see my success as a protest vote -- votes cast for 
Turmel were cast in favour of two good ideas. The public meetings were 
terrible, often with too many candidates on the platform at one time. 
I hope those attending found my performance interesting. I wish to 
protest the Ottawa press coverage of my campaign. What right has the 
Press to tamper with democracy?
DYNOWSKI: I was disappointed but not surprised at my standing in the 
poll. The low profile I unfortunately had to run during the election 
was like to blame to some extent. I intend to involve myself more in 
local politics and run again. 
                  TURMEL POLITICAL PRESS TO 1986 
Ottawa Citizen Letter, John Turmel
Tax discounts
Some people need their tax refunds and so the tax discounters prepare 
the returns and take a percentage for cashing them immediately. 
Revenue Canada should make personnel available to prepare tax returns 
for the same fee as the tax discounters. Then the cheques can be 
issued and cashed on the spot for full value. Revenue Canada can hire 
those personnel who the pool who will be laid off by the discounters. 
Since the returns are supervised by Revenue Canada personnel, less 
auditing would be needed! If the tax discounters can provide the 
service, so can Revenue Canada at a far lesser cost to the needy.
Ottawa Citizen, Pat Bell
Service helps the poor avoid fee on cheques
Picture of Linda, my secretary, captioned "Safer to have cheques than 
Ottawa merchants who are willing to cash post-dated government cheques 
at face value are helping welfare recipients without bank accounts 
avoid the six-per-cent fee at Money Mart cheque-cashing outlets.
Terry Kavanaugh's Sunoco station on Somerset St. is one business 
honoring individual photo-identification cards prepared by the Social 
Credit Party of Ontario, a small political group not accredited in 
this province. Kavanaugh prefers endorsed, post-dated cheques to a 
stack of cash in his till, he says. He will cash monthly social 
assistance cheques ranging from $200 to $600 as long as the people 
presenting them have the photo-identification card and endorse the 
cheque with signature and a thumb print. Since November, he's handled 
about 20 cheques, and Kavanaugh says he'll keep on cashing them 
without charge "until one comes back." 
The fact they may be dated a day or two ahead makes no difference to 
his banking practices, he says, as long as the cheques are cleared in 
time to meet expenses. 
The political group keeps a computerized record of each person 
receiving a card and guarantees to make good only any returned cheque. 
Linda Gordon, manager of the party office at 1,000 Somerset St. W. 
says more than 300 people who regularly faced obstacles in getting 
cheques cashed either because they don't have a bank account or 
because the cheque is post-dated have taken advantage of the free 
identification service. She said most people using the new program are 
single mothers on social assistance who can't afford to keep even a $5 
balance in a monthly bank account. Nobody who has received one of the 
identification cards was willing to discuss the program with the 
Government cheques often arrive two or three days before their cashing 
date and families need money immediately, Gordon said. When they take 
them to Money Mart, a cheque-cashing business with two outlets in 
Ottawa and 30 across the country, they must pay a 6% fee for the 
service. The Social Credit program to cut into Money Mart's profits 
was started in October by John Turmel, a perennial fringe candidate in 
provincial and civic elections, and an advocate of interest-free 
loans. For two months, he cashed cheques himself for people who came 
for the photo-identification cards. The idea of enlisting community 
merchants arose because staff realized it was unwise to have large 
amounts of cash at the office, Gordon said. They cash no cheques now. 
Instead, individuals receive their free computerized photo-
identification card after Gordon takes a thumb print, voice print, 
videotaped record and signature. Some people are given the name and 
address of one of about 20 "foster merchants" willing to cash 
government cheques. Others are encouraged to ask a restaurant or other 
business they frequent to become their regular cheque casher, with the 
guarantee that the Social Credit party will assume responsibility for 
any bad cheque. Not every business finds convenient. Owners of Between 
Friends Gift shop in Place Bell Canada have stopped being foster 
merchants because checking identification and taking thumb prints of 
cheque cashers took time and was embarrassing in front of customers 
lined up for lottery tickets or other purchases. "Many businesses find 
it safer to have cheques around than a lot of cash. We're only asking 
them to cash government cheques, no personal cheques. 
The photo-identification program has drawn mixed reactions. On one 
hand, officials at regional social services and the social planning 
council applaud an arrangement that helps low-income families cash 
their cheques. At the same time, they agree with critics who say this 
is exactly what banks should be doing. Stephen Clark, Money Mart 
president, says his cheque cashing service fills a gap left by the 
banks for people on low or erratic incomes who either can't or don't 
want to maintain an account. In a telephone interview, he said Money 
Mart customers aren't complaining about the charges. Organizations are 
complaining on their behalf without hearing from individuals. "It's a 
business, just like any other. There's a lot of work and we generally 
lose money for the first 18 months. Poor people use the service, just 
like poor people take taxis when you might think they should take 
buses." He said the bulk of business comes from low-income earners who 
need to cash a cheque after banking hours or people who prefer to deal 
only in cash. People on welfare make up a small percentage of users. 
Most have already found other places to cash their cheques. 
Dick Stewart, director of program delivery for the region's social 
services department, said, "In an ideal world, people could cash 
social assistance cheques easily at a bank. But if local businesses 
are willing to to this and the identification card helps, how can I 
object?" (I wonder who was asking him if he objected?)
Frank Martin, director of the Social Planning Council, says banks 
should make it easier for people to cash their cheques because "even a 
couple of days is a very long time to wait for many single parent 
A spokesman for the National Anti-Poverty Organization says the Social 
Credit Party's identification cards aren't the solution to banks' 
inflexible cheque-cashing services that exclude poor people. Fred 
Bever, a researcher with NAPO says "Whether or not they are well-
meaning, they are exploiting people who need the service in order to 
publicize the political party." (Finally, they found someone to object 
to what I've done.) He said he believes there is subtle pressure on 
people to affiliate with the party. Similarly, he thinks people who 
have their cheques cashed by certain merchants will feel pressure to 
buy from them. "It is critical that people on social assistance have 
access to banks and that banks provide services" Bever said. (How dare 
we make people feel so good about us that they might feel like joining 
and how dare merchants be so nice as to cash their cheques that they 
might want to purchase something with the money they just saved. Talk 
about smearing a noble effort and by a group who are supposed to be 
helping the poor. Yet again, if poverty would be solved, he'd have no 
job so don't expect him to endorse anything that would ease poverty 
and threaten his job.)
Jane Leslie, spokesman for the Royal Bank, said people who want to 
cash their regular monthly government cheque don't have to open an 
account or keep a minimum balance. "They are just asked to sign a 
signature card. We're trying to establish a relationship, a 
familiarity, so the person becomes known at that branch of the bank. 
Spokesmen at Ottawa branches said they will cash government cheques up 
to three days early but only for people who have made themselves known 
as regular account holders or Cheque cashers at that location.
Ottawa Citizen, John Kessel
Court forbids John Turmel to picket CJOH (C)
Turmel forbidden to picket CJOH with "cheat" sign
John Turmel, a fringe candidate in municipal, provincial and federal 
elections throughout Ontario, has been gagged by the court. In a 
ruling handed down Thursday by District Court judge David McWilliam, 
Turmel was ordered never again to picket outside CJOH-TV on Merivale 
Road with a sign saying: "Max Keeping is a cheat. Max Keeping owes me 
$3,525." The permanent injunction was granted to CJOH and Keeping, 
news director and anchorman, because the sign suggested Keeping had 
defrauded Turmel. It follows an interim injunction McWilliam granted 
in June 1984. Turmel contended Keeping and CJOH had "cheated" him 
during a Dec. 15, 1983 Stormont-Dundas-Glengarry provincial by-
election by not permitting him to join the TV candidates' debate. 
Turmel said the equivalent air time would have cost him $3,525. 
However McWilliam told Turmel: "You took the English language and 
marshaled it for your own purposes." The sign conveyed the message 
that Keeping was "not to be trusted ... deceitful" and offered no 
explanation, McWilliam said. "You cannot go out into the public and 
charge someone with fraud," McWilliam said, although the judge 
conceded Turmel might be, "in a highly technical sense, remotely 
right." When Turmel asked McWilliam whether he could picket the 
station carrying different signs, the judge said the injunction is 
only for the words used in the June 1984 sign. Turmel began picketing 
the station then after the Ontario Supreme Court dismissed his claim 
for damages from CJOH for defamation. Running under the banner "The 
Engineer," Turmel has run for the mayoralty of both Ottawa and Nepean. 
He claims to the leader of the unaccredited Social Credit Party of 
Ontario. When not waging election campaigns, he can be found filing 
numerous motions in various courts challenging the right of money 
lenders to charge interest and the province's gambling laws. He argues 
these cases himself.
Ottawa Citizen, Corrections
A story and headline in Friday's paper were incorrect in saying fringe 
candidate John Turmel has been forbidden by a district court judge 
from ever again picketing CJOH-TV. In fact, the judge ordered Turmel 
not to picket with a particular sign calling news director Max Keeping 
a cheat. The Citizen apologizes for the error. 
Ottawa Herald
Best of Ottawa
The best loser
Ottawa's gambling economists, John Turmel, calls his line of Social 
Credit politics "friendly credit." Altogether, Turmel has run for 
political office 20 times, including for mayor of Ottawa of Ottawa, 
mayor of Nepean, Gloucester alderman as well as federally and 
provincially in the Ottawa area and has never won a seat. Of course, 
Turmel doesn't limit his political charades to Ottawa, he's running 
next month in a Toronto by-election. 
What a cheap shot about "political charades." 
Toronto Sun, Ciaran Ganley
Gambler-politico plays hand of 21
Ottawa gambler and 21-time political candidate John Turmel has brought 
his economic cure-all message to Metro. Turmel, who wears a white 
hard-hat with "the engineer" stenciled on it, is one of the five 
fringe candidates in tomorrow's York East by-election. 
The engineering grad and political gadfly is well-known in Ottawa for 
his one-man campaign against interest rates. He can often be seen 
protesting alone against interest rates on Parliament Hill and makes a 
point of picketing the Bank of Canada on every Thursday. Three times 
he has had legal cases against Bank of Canada Governor Gerald Bouey 
thrown out by the Supreme Court of Canada after being ridiculed out of 
numerous lower courts. Turmel tried to get Bouey charged with genocide 
and keeping a common gaming house. He claims interest rates cause 
starvation and the Bank of Canada is gambling that customers will be 
able to repay principal and interest on their loans. 
He says he's running in East York because it is his duty to "take 
every opportunity I can to explain my solution to inflation and 
unemployment." Revamping the monetary system and outlawing interest 
rates would solve the country's economic ills, he says. 
The other fringe candidates are John McLellan of the Communist Party, 
Mark Adair of the Green Party, Libertarian Jim McIntosh, and 
independent Jack Arshawsky. Candidates for the major three parties are 
Liberal Christine Hart, Tory Gina Brannan, and NDPer Gord Crann.
Ottawa Citizen, Jacquie Miller
Fewer welfare recipients paying fee to cash cheques
The number of welfare recipients who pay a fee to cash cheques has 
dropped by more than half since regional welfare officials changed the 
way they date the cheques. They started mailing cheques one day before 
the date on the cheque. Meanwhile, problems remain. Even if cheques 
aren't post-dated, welfare clients often have problems cashing them at 
banks. Often, welfare clients don't have adequate identification.
Kapuskasing Northern Times, Mike Cloutier
John Turmel enters his 22nd election
For the 22nd time, John Turmel will try to get his message across to 
the voters, this time in the Aug. 14 provincial by-election. John 
Turmel, 35, of Ottawa has run in a host of municipal, provincial and 
federal elections under his Social Credit banner. He is the founder 
and president of the not yet registered Social Credit party of Ontario 
and offers a simple solution to all the problems of the world. If 
interest on money was abolished, and a system of barter introduced, 
energy, in the form of money that is now being paid to the banks, 
could be freed to solve every problem under the sun. He said it is no 
problem that can't be fixed with an investment of work, resources and 
available technology. He wants to print up "credit notes" and give 
them to people for whatever they produce. The notes would be exchanged 
by people for goods and services, but the notes can't be used to make 
more notes in thee form of interest. The notes are valueless, just 
paper, but it is what they represent that would give them value. They 
would be backed by the market value of the country's resources. 
He pointed to a situation where a man paid for goods with a bad 
cheque. That cheque was passed along from businessman to businessman, 
doing "an incredible amount of work." Finally when the last man went 
to the bank, the cheque bounced. He was stiffed, but goods and 
services were produced. If the last man didn't have to go to the bank, 
the cheque would still be working: it would still have value.
Mr. Turmel, a systems engineer, who "scored genius in mathematics, is 
a professional gambler. He used his math abilities to win vast amounts 
of money in Las Vegas casinos and finally got barred from three hotels 
in Las Vegas, he said. He has been called a "guerrilla lawyer" when he 
used the courts to stop the foreclosure of mortgages for a number of 
people, he said. He brings with him a "stiff the bank kit" and 
promises anyone who is faced with foreclosure on his house to live 
rent-free for a year in the house. He will ask the voters in Cochrane 
North to vote for him because the other established parties have shown 
their incompetence, with the world getting worse. He wants to save the 
world. "What else does a genius in mathematics do in his spare time?" 
he asked.
Cochrane Northern Post, Don Earle
Bank-basher runs in Cochrane
Call an election and John C. Turmel will run in it. So it's no 
surprise that Turmel, the social credit engineer, is running in the 
Aug. 14 Cochrane by-election. This is the 23rd election Turmel has run 
in since 1979 which he insists is some kind of record.
Mr. Turmel has received his fair share of notoriety down south as a 
bank basher who has gone to bat for the victims of high interest 
rates. The 35-year-old engineering graduate from Carleton University 
calls himself a professional gambler and politician. "I gamble with 
millionaires. That allows me to run in these elections and I can help 
poor people who are in court," Turmel said. Five years ago, Turmel 
launched legal proceedings in the Supreme Court of Ontario to force 
the Bank of Canada to stop charging interest rates. Turmel claimed 
that Gerald Bouey, the governor of the Bank of Canada, with keeping a 
common gaming house which is illegal under the criminal code of 
Canada. The case was ultimately dismissed by the Supreme Court. Turmel 
was also involved in Jean Metcalfe's battle three years ago, to keep 
her home in Smith's Falls, after the Bank of Montreal threatened to 
foreclose on the mortgage. Mrs. Metcalfe was the vi was the victim of 
a series of allergies that made it impossible for her to live in any 
home, but her own. Mr. Turmel said he was running in Cochrane North to 
fight the anti-social credit system of government. He planned to head 
the court house early this week, to get a list of homeowners 
threatened with foreclosure that he could possibly assist them to stay 
in their homes.
Instead of money, Turmel thinks workers should earn tax credit notes 
that could be bartered. "If people had more currency in their wallets, 
doctors could afford to extra-bill," Turmel said. "I am pro-life as 
well. If there was more money in circulation people wouldn't have the 
excuse of poverty to justify abortions," he added. More money in 
circulation would also lick the problem if acid rain, since the major 
corporations would have the cash on hand to clean up the environment, 
he said. "If we don't start workbees to clean up the environment 
pretty soon, we are going to have to live underground," Turmel 
maintained. "Interest rates are unsafe, they are a threat to us all, 
that is why I am picketing the Bank of canada every Thursday," he 
added. He concludes by saying that poverty is nothing more than a man-
made scarcity of money, that can be corrected with a complete overhaul 
of the banking system. "The present system of currency is  nothing 
more than a software computer package. All we have to do is change the 
software package to a system of tax credit notes," Turmel claimed.
Cochrane Northern Post, Don Earle
"Cracker-jack" candidates are lambasted by Cochrane North NDP
Attacking Cochrane North by-election candidates as "cracker-jacks", 
the NDP riding association claims "most of the candidates are from 
southern Ontario and are using Cochrane North as a battlefield for 
their misguided propaganda." The group termed independents John Turmel 
and Graham McCready as "self-appointed, inoffensive ombudsmen from 
southern Ontario who are trying to represent the residents of Cochrane 
North without bothering to study important local issues. The 
association added that it perceives the by-election "as a cracker-jack 
box, unfortunately without a prize for the people of Cochrane North."
Le Nord, Francis Bouchard
Turmel is the founder of the Social Credit party of Ontario. He's an 
electrical engineer. He wants tax credits for workbees. It will reduce 
taxes. He's in his 22nd election. He'll help people fight their 
foreclosures. It explains what a mortgage is. Explains the Greenbacks 
with Abraham Lincoln. Explains the dividend and the robot revolution. 
If they want to have a chance to save the environment, they have to 
vote for John Turmel.
Le Nouvelliste, Andre Dion
Independent Creditiste candidate John Turmel
John Turmel became yesterday the fifth candidate running for Jean 
Chretien's seat. He's presenting himself as an independent Socred and 
is well known on Parliament Hill. Every Thursday for 5.5 years, he 
demonstrates in front of the Bank of Canada to protest high interest 
rates. Founder and president of the Ontario Social Credit party, he's 
in his 23rd election. He's counting on coming to all the candidates' 
debates. He doesn't believe in knocking on doors. Besides, the 
majority of people don't know why they're voting, they just vote with 
their eyes, they vote for the color. 
An adversary of the banks and high finance, John Turmel is an 
electrical engineer, qualified himself as an expert in the mathematics 
of gambling and advocates a system which would put an end to economic 
poverty based on the theory of Major C.H. Douglas. He would like to 
see a tax credit system established which would work like the old 
corvees which permitted citizens to pay their taxes by participating 
on public works. Having recourse to tax credits, which would be 
distributed without interest to workers, a creditiste government 
wouldn't be obliged to collect taxes to pay interest and therefore 
taxes would be reduced. The corvee system would be a good way to put 
people to work. 
Hebdo St. Maurice, Lucie Carrier
John Turmel: Fifth candidate
SHAWINIGAN -- A fifth candidate, John Turmel, is running as a Socred 
independent. He's an electrical engineer and the mathematics of 
gambling is his profession. This is his 23rd candidacy. "I'm here to 
teach about corvees and it doesn't matter if I win as long as people 
will have understood that social credits are preferable to tax 
According to him, knowing St. Maurice problems is not important since 
all problems are the same across the country resulting from the 
financial system. And they all boil down to a lack of money which Mr. 
Turmel says can be fixed with a system of social credits. "Interest, 
it's usury, because someone must fail. A system of credit isn't social 
if there is any interest. If we exact interest, the credit becomes 
anti-social because it's physically impossible for all borrowers to 
pay both the principle and the interest when they only got the 
principle," explained Mr. Turmel. Therefore, to replace this system,he 
suggests "A system of social credits functioning like corvees which 
permitted citizens to pay their taxes by participating on public 
works. Having recourse to social credits, a government of creditiste 
philosophy would not be obliged to raise taxes to pay interest and 
therefore taxes would be reduced. The corvee system would be a good 
way to put people to work. 
Le Droit, CP
Turmel says he's a real Creditiste
The independent who is in the St. Maurice election and who speaks in a 
quasi-impeccable French, has indicated it's his 23rd election since 
1979. His campaigns aren't as much to win but to teach the population. 
He says he's a real Creditiste from the Real Caouette and Major 
Douglas schools of "corvees" and "social credits." The government, he 
says, should pay people with tax credit notes that would allow poor 
people to work and pay their taxes, without interest. These notes 
would serve as money they could exchange and would solve unemployment. 
The government talks of creating employment but never of creating the 
pay-cheques. I've found the way to create the pay-cheques, says 
Turmel, an electrical engineer. He promises he'll be in St. Maurice 
when there's a debate. He's convinced that his work will allow people 
to fight "acid rain, nuclear and chemical pollution." Hopefully, 
before it's too late.
Ottawa Citizen, Mme. Pilon
To keep his home, a citizen goes to the Supreme Court
To keep his home, a McWatters resident is going to the Supreme Court 
to get respected his rights that says were violated. His case will be 
heard on Sept. 29. When he spoke to us, he said he was facing an 
eviction order in 3 days. 
The case goes back to 1985 when a judge of the Superior Court in Rouyn 
handed down an interlocutory judgment to have the house seized for the 
price of the materials plus 24% interest per year for the unpaid bill. 
"I don't want them to sell my house. I want to pay but I don't want to 
pay the enormous interest. There were delays in my financing and the 
interest climbed quickly. I could make arrangements with them but I 
can't get gouged with interest.
According to the rules of procedure of the Quebec civil code, there 
has to be a 30 day period between the interlocutory judgment and the 
final judgment to have time for the defendant to lodge an appeal. This 
procedure was not respected because on Sept. 12, the final judgment 
was handed down while the interlocutory judgment had only come out on 
Aug. 20 and it's on this argument that is based his defence. Following 
this judgment, a series of procedures was put into action. Appeal #1. 
Reject of appeal. Appeal #2. Notice of seizure. Opposition to seizure. 
Closure of the appeal and non-closure of the appeal. How can an 
ordinary citizen get through all this. It's with the counsel of Mr. 
John C. Turmel, well known in the Ottawa region for his defence of 
small home-owners that the defendant decided to go to the Supreme 
Court because of delays and the closure of the appeal weren't 
respected. It's on these details of procedure that he will go to the 
Supreme Court. The base of the problem remains and is aggravated by 
the rising interest since the action began. "I want to pay for my 
house," he said, "but it doesn't make any sense to pay all the 
interest that has passed $3,000. If I had to do what they want, I 
couldn't keep my house."
Journal de Montreal, Andre Dalcourt
The only minor counterpoints Brian Mulroney ran into were from one 
fellow and when the independent candidate John Turmel heckled him, 
picket sign in hand, from far away. The Prime Minister ignored him: 
John Turmel is a Creditiste visionary who follows him at every 
election. As proof, he was also a candidate against him in Central 
Nova last August, 1983. 
Le Nouvelliste, Louise Plante
Trois-Rivieres police arrest Turmel
Picture of me coming out of police station
The Three Rivers police had to intervene at the CHLN station after a 
brief altercation with independent creditiste candidate John Turmel 
and journalists at the radio station. Turmel, who didn't bother too 
much to make know his program during the campaign, insisted on the 
right to participate in the debate when the Omnibus program was aired 
just like the Liberal, Tory and NDP candidates. But the news director 
Jean Denoncourt, who decided his listeners couldn't handle more than 
three candidates at a time didn't agree and tried to stop Turmel from 
entering. Regardless, Turmel was more agile and managed to make his 
way into the recording studio. It took the help of the police to get 
him dislodge him. They brought him to the police station for 
disturbing the peace. In his cell, he didn't hear a word of the 
debate. Not once during his incarceration did he ask to see a lawyer. 
Turmel will soon receive a summons for municipal court. But Le 
Nouvelliste learned that he had lodged a complaint against the 
journalist who tried to stop him. Mr. Denoncourt says he never hit the 
candidate. But it took more that this to stop the incident. As soon as 
he was released, he went to Shawinigan to picket at City Hall for a 
civic reception in honor of Mr. and Mrs. Mulroney. The police didn't 
let him pass the security cordon and it was from a distance that he 
had to shout his thoughts when Mulroney was entering. Turmel also 
didn't manage to attract the attention of the national media... who 
have seen others.
Ottawa Citizen, Don McGillivray
Banking is mostly a confidence game. It started with simple 
safekeeping of money or other valuables. The bankers found they could 
earn interest by lending the money they were keeping. And then they 
learned they could lend more money than they had because when people 
write cheques, they often just shift the money from one account to 
another without having to see the cash. So banks started to create 
money. But the whole house of cards comes tumbling down if the 
depositors lose confidence in the bank because they all come at once 
me at once demanding not only to see their money but to take it away.

Send a comment to John Turmel