Survey of Election Officers Following the 40th General Election
Level of Awareness, Understanding and Compliance with the New ID Requirements
New ID Requirements: General Assessment and Impact on Voting Time
Overall, Election Officers report that the voter identification process went well (an average of 95%). This seems to have been less likely the case in Saskatchewan (90%), Manitoba (92%)and the Atlantic provinces (91%).
The procedure was also reported to be more difficult to implement in mobile polls (90%).
The impact of the new requirements on voting time differs among regions and types of polls. More than one in two (56%) officers report that the new voter ID requirements slowed down the voting process (41% of respondents said it took a little longer, while 15% said ittook a lot longer).
Officers working in the Atlantic provinces (71%), Manitoba (72%), Saskatchewan (76%) and the advance polls (65%) were more likely to claim that the voting process was slowed down by the new voter identification requirements.
New ID Requirements: Officers' Level of Compliance with the Identification Procedures
Most supervisors and IO's (93%) report informing electors of the new identification requirements when showing up at the polling station; asking them to show their ID and verifying they had the proper ID.
8% overall report not verifying whether electors had the proper ID prior to voting. In Alberta, one in five (20%) supervisors and IO's did not verify if electors had proper ID.
Respondents who worked in advanced polls were more likely to verify that electors had proper ID than those who worked on election day (96% in advanced polls versus 90% in ordinary polls).
When electors showed up at your site, did you inform them of the new identification requirement? (Supervisors and Information officers) N=1226
Region
Staffing Position
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
CPS
IO
Yes
93%
red colour 100%
92%
92%
98%
95%
100%
92%
98%
89%
94%
93%
No
6%
blue colour 0%
7%
7%
2%
3%
0%
8%
2%
10%
5%
6%
I don't know
1%
0%
1%
1%
0%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
Did you ask them to prepare their identification documents? (Supervisors and Information officers) N=1226
Region
Staffing Position
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
CPS
IO
Yes
93%
96%
red colour 96%
92%
83%
95%
92%
89%
100%
99%
blue colour 91%
red colour 94%
No
6%
4%
blue colour 3%
6%
17%
1%
8%
11%
0%
1%
7%
5%
I don't know
1%
0%
1%
1%
0%
red colour 4%
0%
0%
0%
0%
red colour 2%
blue colour 0%
Did you verify that they had proper identification documents? (Supervisors and Information officers) N=1226
Region
Staffing Position
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
CPS
IO
Yes
91%
red colour 96%
92%
91%
91%
94%
blue colour 80%
90%
100%
99%
blue colour 89%
red colour 93%
No
8%
4%
7%
8%
9%
5%
red colour 20%
10%
0%
1%
red colour 10%
blue colour 7%
I don't know
1%
0%
1%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
New ID Requirements: Electors' Level of Awareness and Compliance with the Identification Procedures
According to DRO's, the electors' reaction to the new ID requirements was significantly different from one region to the next.
Quebec and Alberta electors were particularly receptive to the new procedures, as opposed to electors in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and in the Atlantic provinces.
Overall, most election officers think that electors were well prepared for the new requirements (average of 86%).
Electors in the Atlantic provinces (80%) and Saskatchewan (81%) as well as those who went to vote in mobile polls (78%) were lessprepared than other electors.
New ID Requirements: Validation of Electors' Personal Information
Less than one DRO in five report experiencing problems when verifying the identity (16%) or address (19%) of electors.
About one DRO in four in Manitoba (27%), Saskatchewan (28%), BC (29%) and in the North (28%), as well as those working in advance polls (27%) report experiencing specific problems in validating electors' addresses.
When asked to describe these problems, DRO's report that the largest problems were electors showing up with either improper ID (45%) or outdated address on ID (15%).
Did you experience specific problems when verifying the identity of electors? N=1889 (Deputy returning officers)
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
Yes
16%
17%
blue colour 13%
15%
14%
19%
20%
19%
30%
16%
No
84%
82%
red colour 87%
85%
86%
81%
79%
81%
70%
84%
Did you experience specific problems when verifying the address of electors? N=1889 (Deputy returning officers)
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
Yes
19%
20%
blue colour 14%
blue colour 17%
27%
red colour 28%
22%
red colour 29%
11%
28%
No
80%
80%
red colour 86%
83%
73%
blue colour 71%
77%
blue colour 70%
89%
72%
Could you briefly describe these problems? N=480 Top Answers
Total
Electors coming in with unproper ID ( no picture ID, wrong adress,...)
45%
Outdated adress on ID / people who moved in recently, students
15%
The polling list wasn't updated / was incomplete
9%
Some people weren't aware of the new ID procedures requirements
9%
People not speaking english / french (immigrants, aboriginals)
4%
Problems with P.O. Box and rural adresses / no street adress
3%
***People sent / came to wrong polling stations
3%
In their opinion, officers state that the most frequent problem electors had in proving their identity and address was not having an identification card (25%), followed by not having a card with a current or proper address (24%).
Officers from the Atlantic provinces (36%) and Manitoba (36%) are more likely to believe that the main problem was not having an identification card.
Officers from British Columbia (41%) are more likely to believe that the main problem was not having a card with a current or proper address.
In your opinion, what was the most frequent problem electors had in proving their identity and address? N=3115 Top Answers
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
No identification card
25%
red colour 36%
blue colour 19%
26%
red colour 36%
26%
28%
24%
50%
22%
No card with current/proper address
24%
21%
blue colour 16%
25%
21%
29%
26%
red colour 41%
25%
25%
No problems at all
19%
18%
19%
19%
18%
15%
22%
18%
1%
15%
When asked about the commonality of certain situations, about one in four (23%) DRO's report that it was a common problem for electors to think they could use their Voter Information Card as ID.
DRO's in the Atlantic provinces (4,2), Manitoba (4,2), and Saskatchewan (4) were more likely to say that it was a common mistake for electors to think that they could use their VIC as proof of ID than anywhere else
15% of supervisors and IO's report that it was also a common problem for electors to be showing up at the polls without proper ID.
Certain issues were more frequent in some regions than others. For example, it was more common in BC (29%) and Saskatchewan (28%) for electors not to be able to supply a proof of address (compared with a nation-wide average of 19%).
Less than one in ten officers (8%) report that it was a common problem for electors to be refused their ballot because of their inability to satisfy the new ID requirements.
New ID Requirements: Misuse of the Voter Information Card (VIC)
About three quarters of DRO's (74%) did not accept the VIC (as a piece of ID) and asked for another valid piece of ID. Another 9% of DRO's referred electors to the person in charge and 5% explained the new identification procedures.
However, 9% of DRO's accepted the VIC by comparing it with the information they had.
Accepting the VIC was more common among respondents from Alberta (14%) and those working in advance polls (18%).
What did you do when electors showed their VIC to identify themselves? (DRO's only, N=1177)
Total
ATL.
QC
ON
MAN
SASK
AB
BC
TER.
N. of 50th
Asked them for another valid piece of identification / Had someone vouch for them via oath
74%
77%
76%
71%
80%
74%
73%
79%
100%
73%
Was not valid, did not accept it. / Referred them to people in charge.
9%
red colour 14%
7%
8%
13%
10%
6%
10%
0%
5%
Accepted it / Compared to the information I had.
9%
11%
blue colour 5%
11%
10%
7%
14%
6%
0%
14%
Explained the new procedures.
5%
3%
4%
red colour 7%
0%
5%
4%
4%
0%
8%
Further Suggestions for Future Elections
About 40% of respondents did not have any suggestions on how to improve the conduct of elections.
Among those who did, common suggestions cover a wide variety of aspects. The most common suggestion is to provide better training/more details (16%). An additional 6% indicated that the ID requirements should be simplified from the amount of training to the level of organization.
What would be the first things to change, if anything, to improve the conduct of elections? N=3114 Top Answers
Total
Better Training / More Detailed
16%
ID requirements to be simplified / VIC
6%
Less "Slacker" Employees / Hire competent employees.
Site Menu
