Site Menu1.9 Special ballot voting – Section 1: Conduct of the Electoral EventConduct of the Electoral Event – Returning Officers' Report of Proceedings Summary – 44th General Election
Special Voting Rules process
27. The special ballot voting process went well.
Text version of "27. The special ballot voting process went well."
The bar chart shows that out of 338 ROs:
- 107 strongly agree with the statement
- 196 agree
- 25 are neutral
- 7 disagree
- 3 strongly disagree
303 ROs agreed or strongly agreed with the above statement. On the other hand, 25 were neutral, while 10 disagreed or strongly disagreed.
What went well
- Electors appreciated being able to use the online registration service to verify or update their registrations and register to vote. They also appreciated being able to apply to vote by mail using the secure online document submission feature.
- SAs enjoyed working with IDRS.
- In general, voting at the RO office, voting by mail and counting ballots went well, and the processes were properly followed.
- The training and tools allowed the SAs and SPS to have a good understanding of the SVR processes and to ensure proper execution.
What could be improved
- Further promote special ballot voting and its requirements to electors so they are aware of the different ways to vote.
- The late receipt of special ballots, particularly vote-by-mail ballots, caused major problems. In some cases, the special ballots arrived well after ordinary polling day.
- It was difficult for some elderly electors to apply to vote by mail.
- It was difficult for some electors to match the information on their identification (ID) with their registration information in EC's online registration service. More precisely, issues arose for electors with only a PO Box number or rural address.
- Place the procedures for special ballots under the same manual or section on the Field Personnel Intranet.
- Add a section or marker that clearly identifies "pending" applications. This would improve the processing of SVR in IDRS and minimize the risk of a pending application not being identified.
Administering Special Voting Rules identification rules
28. There were no issues administering the special ballot voting identification rules.
Text version of "28. There were no issues administering the special ballot voting identification rules."
The bar chart shows that out of 338 ROs:
- 104 strongly agree with the statement
- 189 agree
- 27 are neutral
- 13 disagree
- 5 strongly disagree
293 ROs agreed or strongly agreed with the above statement. On the other hand, 27 were neutral, while 18 disagreed or strongly disagreed.
What went well
- Overall, the SVR identification rules were clear, precise and easy to implement.
- The vast majority of electors complied with the identification rules under the SVR and submitted the correct documents in a timely manner.
- The SVR guides and guidelines enabled CPSs and SAs to effectively administer the identification rules.
What could be improved
- Simplify the registration process for electors with a PO Box number or rural mailing address. These electors could not match their ID information with the required registration information, as their home address differed from their mailing address.
Other notable comments
- Several mailed-in special ballots were received after the deadline.
- Some of the special ballots received by mail were invalid, as they were incorrectly filled out.
Candidates' representatives observing Special Voting Rules
29. There were no issues with the presence of candidates' representatives observing the special ballot registration and voting.
Text version of "29. There were no issues with the presence of candidates' representatives observing the special ballot registration and voting."
The bar chart shows that out of 338 ROs:
- 137 strongly agree with the statement
- 105 agree
- 90 are neutral
- 3 disagree
- 3 strongly disagree
242 ROs agreed or strongly agreed with the above statement. On the other hand, 90 were neutral, while 6 disagreed or strongly disagreed.
What went well
- The vast majority of candidates' representatives followed the COVID-19 guidelines, in addition to being respectful to employees.
- Candidates' representatives appreciated and were satisfied with the thoroughness of the SAs towards the SVR.
What could be improved
- During initial meetings with the political parties, provide them with the COVID-19 restrictions and guidelines to be followed in RO and AARO offices and at the polling places.
Other notable comments
- Several ROs mentioned not having observers during registration and voting under the SVR.
Administering vote-by-mail
30. There were no issues administering voting by mail.
Text version of "30. There were no issues administering voting by mail."
The bar chart shows that out of 338 ROs:
- 44 strongly agree with the statement
- 150 agree
- 52 are neutral
- 71 disagree
- 21 strongly disagree
194 ROs agreed or strongly agreed with the above statement. On the other hand, 52 were neutral, while 92 disagreed or strongly disagreed.
What went well
- In general, electors were able to complete their vote-by-mail applications in "E-Registration" (E-Reg), the Online Voter Registration Service.
- The administration of vote-by-mail applications in IDRS by the SAs went smoothly.
- Once the online applications were approved, the special ballot voting kits were promptly mailed to electors.
- Drop boxes in ordinary polling places allowed for the collection of several completed special ballot voting kits.
- The volume of vote-by-mail applications was easily managed in the majority of EDs.
What could be improved
- Establish an earlier application deadline for special ballot voting kits to allow more time for special ballots to be mailed and counted. Many of the special ballots associated with vote-by-mail were received after the deadline.
- Clearly indicate to electors that their special ballot must be received by a certain date to be counted.
- The late opening of RO offices resulted in a backlog of applications for many EDs.
- Review the current vote-by-mail process to align it with the realities of Northern Canada.
- Simplify the identification process in E-Reg. Some elderly electors had their initial special ballot applications rejected due to technical challenges.
Other notable comments
- Delays with Canada Post in returning special ballots resulted in many ballots not being counted because they were received after the deadline.