Site MenuReport on the Evaluations of the 40th General Election of October 14, 2008
Foreword
Before the call of the 40th general election, Elections Canada designed a formal process for assessing its performance in conducting that election, measuring the impacts of the most recent changes made to the electoral framework and identifying areas for improvement. This report, a first for Elections Canada, discusses the results of our evaluations. It serves as a bridge between the Report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada on the 40th General Election of October 14, 2008, and the report on recommended amendments to the Canada Elections Act that I aim to submit before the end of this year.
I am pleased to share this report with the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. It is based on data gathered before, during and after the election. Pre-election activities included a series of focus groups with official agents and consultations with election stakeholders and various groups of electors that might experience difficulty with the new voter identification requirements. Post-election evaluation activities included surveys,Footnote 1 as well as internal evaluations, such as debriefings with returning officers and field liaison officers. The report also benefits from the informal feedback we received from the Advisory Committee of Political Parties and individual members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
One challenge all evaluations based on complementary methodologies face is in distilling the feedback received through various surveys, focus groups and individual consultations into a succinct report. It is simply not possible to ensure that every perspective is included. We have, nevertheless, striven to ensure that the main messages from the input we received have been incorporated into this report.
As noted in my earlier report on the election, there were three areas of the electoral framework that merited additional attention: the new voter identification requirements, the current political financing rules, and constraints on our ability to administer the electoral process. This report elaborates on each of these areas by reviewing the election from the perspectives of voters, political entities and Elections Canada itself.
For the vast majority of electors, voting went very smoothly, even though this election was the first where they had to prove their identity and address before voting. Communications, outreach and the training of poll workers formed the backbone of our approach to ensuring that these requirements were well understood and applied. It appeared to work successfully. Most voters were aware of the new requirements, accepted them and were prepared to satisfy them. Nevertheless, some groups of voters found voting more difficult than the general population did, particularly because of the proof-of-address requirement. To mitigate this challenge, Elections Canada will explore the possibility of adding its voter information card to the list of authorized documents that can be used to establish address. We also believe there is an opportunity to look at the current vouching provisions of the Act. The concern is that these may be overly restrictive, for example, in the case of family members.
The main concern expressed by candidates was the difficulties they faced in finding someone willing, available or qualified to be their official agent. A prime challenge stems from the complexity of the current political financing rules, which impose an enormous burden on official agents in terms of the legislative requirements, the level of responsibility and effort required to do the job. Easing this regulatory burden requires action on two fronts. Elections Canada can implement some administrative improvements, but it is the legislation itself that drives most of the complexity and makes the job daunting. I therefore plan to return to Parliament with recommendations concerning this issue as part of my next report.
To administer each election, Elections Canada must recruit, train and monitor a small army of workers. The bulk of this responsibility falls to our returning officers, who face significant obstacles and challenges in this area, some of which stem from restrictions imposed by the Act. Post-mortem sessions conducted with returning officers have made it clear that, while administrative improvements can contribute to minimizing the difficulties they face, there is a real concern that the Act itself may be imposing an unsustainable approach to managing polls. This area merits the attention of Parliament and I intend, in my recommendations report, to bring forward proposals aimed at reducing some of these constraints.
Turnout in the 40th general election was the lowest recorded in any Canadian federal election. Such low turnout is worrisome, and speaks to societal issues that are larger than Elections Canada's administration of electoral events. Our evaluations make clear that voter participation is a complex phenomenon that results from a variety of factors, which we need to better understand. Elections Canada plans to continue its research into these factors, to support future improvements to the electoral process that may help in mitigating this trend; however, it is clear that this issue requires the broad engagement and collaboration of civil society.
Finally, I wish to thank all those who took the time to meet with us, complete our surveys and provide forthright feedback on the conduct of the 40th general election. The depth and diversity of this feedback bespeaks a high level of engagement in working with Elections Canada to provide Canadians with an accessible electoral framework that they trust and use.
Marc Mayrand
Chief Electoral Officer of Canada
June 2009
Footnote 1 A list of the evaluations considered in preparing this report appears in Appendix 1. More information about the timing and methodology used for these surveys appears in Appendix 2; the survey reports may be found on the Elections Canada Web site at www.elections.ca.