New Rules Stopped 450,000 Canadians from Voting
Upped ID requirements may have affected some close federal races.
Close to half a million Canadians who wanted to vote in fall's federal election did not cast ballots because of new identification requirements, and that may have changed the outcome of several close races, concludes The Tyee based on government figures now available.
ID problems stymieing voters were widespread and worst for senior citizens and the homeless, finds Marc Mayrand, chief electoral officer, in an election report, released last week.
"There were. . . difficulties at the polls in the 40th general election," Mayrand's report said. "We received anecdotal reports that some electors were unable to present pieces of identification and official documents that could prove their residence."
Bill C-31 made changes to the Canada Elections Act in 2007, requiring voters to prove their identity and where they live before they may cast a ballot. British Columbia adopted similar rules last year.
There are three ways voters can prove who they are and where they live for federal elections: by providing one piece of photo ID that includes their name and address; by showing two pieces of identification authorized by the chief electoral officer that include their name, with one of them also showing their address; or by swearing an oath and being vouched for by another voter who has the correct identification.
Despite efforts to let people know about the change in identification rules, said Mayrand's report, there were problems across the nation on election day.
Small percentages
Mayrand's report doesn't say how many people had problems during the general election, but it refers back to surveys taken after seven byelections held between the passing of the identification laws and the federal vote.
While byelections often have lower turn-out than general elections, only one change was made to the voter identification rules before October's country-wide vote: hospital bracelets for residents of long-term care facilities were added to the list of acceptable identification. Otherwise, the list of accepted documents remained the same.
"Survey results indicated that the implementation of the new voter identification requirements went smoothly overall," said Mayrand's report. But while 94 per cent found the identification rules easy to meet, four per cent "said they did not vote because they lacked proper documentation."
Another four per cent got to the polls without the proper identification, it said. While most of them went home and got what they needed, or swore an oath and were vouched for, half a per cent "finally did not vote."
Expressed in percentages, the numbers might sound miniscule, but when multiplied over Canada's population of potential voters, they approach half a million frustrated voters.
Large numbers
There were 23.7 million people registered to vote in the federal election, and roughly 13.7 million of them actually did cast a ballot. That means 10 million did not.
If 4.5 per cent of those who did not vote were discouraged or prevented by the identification laws, it comes out to a whopping 450,000 people.
Here's another way to look at it. In the last election, in 2006, 14.6 million people voted. If 4.5 per cent of those likely voters were kept from voting by the new rules, as the survey results suggest, that would mean as many as 650,000 people were affected.
That might sound outlandish, but remember that some 990,000 fewer Canadians voted in 2008 than did in 2006. The theoretical drop caused by the identification rules would account for about two-thirds of that actual fall in voter turn out.
Surveys underestimate numbers
"We're dealing with huge numbers of people," said Jim Quail, the executive director of the B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre and a lawyer who has been challenging the identification laws in court. Filed in B.C. Supreme Court, the trial is scheduled to be heard in June.
"One has mixed feelings," he said. "It's appalling, but it shows there's an urgent problem the court needs to address. It shows there's a foundation for our case."
Telephone surveys likely underestimate the problem, he said. They tend to miss people who have no phones, such as people who are homeless, poor or living in remote places such as First Nation reserves. In short, they miss exactly the same people who are most likely to be affected by the change in voting rules.
"Affluent people living in prosperous urban neighbourhoods are unlikely to have had a problem," said Quail. "It's predictable that that number isn't evenly distributed."
This lines up with what the surveyors found, by the way. The identification laws had a greater effect in some ridings than others. In northern Saskatchewan's Desnethé–Missinippi–Churchill River riding, for example, as many as 10 per cent were missing the required documents.
Asked who likely benefitted from the new rule, one of the case's plaintiffs, Victoria activist Rose Henry, said, "The people who have their identification. The people who would have been voting in favour of the current government in power." People who are housed and in well paying jobs, she added.
People who are struggling in the current system, the people with the most to gain from a change in government, were likely left out, she said, if not scared off by the new rules. "I think a lot of people just didn't bother voting," she said. "It disenfranchised a lot of people who normally would go out and vote. . . Was this the government's way of ensuring the party they wanted to get in got in?"
Disenfranchisement wins close races?
When the changes were made -- recommended by a parliamentary committee then passed by the House of Commons -- every party but the NDP supported them, Quail said.
The obvious question is what difference the rules made on election day, he said. "You wonder how many seats would have been decided differently."
Assuming a conservative number of 450,000 were prevented or discouraged from voting, and dividing by 308 ridings, one comes up with about 1,400 votes per riding that were never cast.
As Mayrand's report notes, there were five ridings decided by fewer than 70 votes. At least another 20, according to the official results, were within 1,000.
Elections Canada is looking at the identification requirements, the report said, and will look at "administrative improvements" the agency can make or propose to the parliamentarians who make the laws.
The problems, and the solutions if they are brought forward, should be closely noted by British Columbians. The province adopted similar voter identification laws last year, which will be used for the first time in a B.C. general election in May. In both B.C. and Canada, politicians justified the laws as a way to avoid voter fraud, despite the fact no evidence of widespread fraud was ever presented in either jurisdiction.
Related Tyee stories:
- Advocates on watch for voter identification problems
- Oppal Confused on Voter ID Law?
AG calls tightened requirements a 'good move' but cites report that says opposite. - Hot Button Bill: Libs Rush to Change Election Laws
Diverse foes say Bill 42 would crimp free speech, hurt poor voters.




34
Login or register to post comments
hvarcegovac
3 years ago
citizenship
Apparently another problem was that many people who do not have Canadian citizenship and legally are not allowed to vote actually did vote.
Revenue Canada forms contain a check box that asks tax payers to share their information with Elections Canada. However this is not quite clear because many people who do not have citizenship but do pay taxes have checked the box and submitted their information. When all of this data is shared with Elections Canada, they have no way of actually referencing and verifying who is a citizen. Apparently a significant number of people who are not eligible to vote received voters cards and actually got to vote since no one ever asks for proof of citizenship when you go to the voting place.
There are major issues with our electoral system and lack of integration of voters lists across federal, provincial and municipal levels. Time for some smart thinking.
Vortigern1
3 years ago
Broken lists.
I agree that there are problems with the voters lists. Having voted in the same riding in the previous election, and having checked the box every time on my tax return, come the last election it turned out that I wasn't on the list. As a political junkie, I made sure to vote, but no doubt some people wouldn't have bothered.
Perhaps what is needed is not just an integration of voters lists, but a proper door-to-door enumeration, as used to be done? Carry one out every five years, in conjunction with the census, and then share the information with the relevant jurisdictions?
Percy
3 years ago
Uhm, how's that?
Uhm, the article says voters can cast their ballot without ID if they just swear an oath. Then it says that this rule is scaring people away. It doesn't explain how this would be so, or how this unusual conclusion could be arrived at.
Seems the writer is pitching to allow anyone to vote without ID or oath. Now, that WOULD encourage a lot of people to vote...ha ha ha.
G West
3 years ago
Door to door enumeration
Should never have been stopped. Check the statistics...along with the fact that enumerators are in the best position to check ID (at the voter's residence) to eliminate imaginary problems with fraud.
BC Mary
3 years ago
Corruption at all levels of society
Godamighty, it seems as if the Welcome Mat is carefully laid out for every possible form of corruption in B.C.
Andrew MacLeod
3 years ago
Oath
Responding to Percy's point: the requirement is to take an oath AND be vouched for by someone who has the correct identification. Swearing an oath alone is no longer enough.
G West
3 years ago
Percy
Check the rules, there's more to it than simply swearing an oath.
apollyon
3 years ago
I almost didn't vote...
I went to the poll here in Parkdale-High Park (where Gerrard Kennedy beat incumbent NDP candidate Peggy Nash) with my new passport thinking that it was all the identification I needed. After all, I was also bringing along the voter card mailed to me by the government so what more proof of residence did they require than that I had received their voting card??
Unfortunately, after waiting in an unusually long line-up I was told I had to bring in some piece of ID with my address or some other documentation listing that I did in fact live where my voting card said I did :/
I had gone to vote after work so the polls were near closing but I did in fact return - much to my chagrin.
I also had friends with the same issue (many students move around frequently so they don't always have ID with their most current address) so I can believe it when this report cites the number above. I'm just glad its finally getting some attention so many months down the road...
Dan the socialist
3 years ago
I think that was brought in
I think that was brought in on purpose and not to make sure everyone was 'legal' but ulterior motives were involved.
hg
3 years ago
residenbcy
Somebody can explain to me please, how a homeless person provides proof of residency?
reallife
3 years ago
Seriously Folks
Does anyone really believe the law was changed to keep homeless people from voting? (Please help - the paranoids are after me.)
biscotti
3 years ago
rules discourage rural voters
Where I live in small town BC, the post office will only accept mail addressed with P.O. box numbers, not street addresses, so lots of people only get mail with a POB, which won't pass at the polls. I agree, bring back the enumerators.
Frank
3 years ago
reallife
"Does anyone really believe the law was changed to keep homeless people from voting?"
Yes
Are you one of those that thinks aliens are arriving in Canada from a huge mothership and voting in our elections so as to elect candidates that won't ask questions about UFO's and therefore we need to show oodles of ID so as to thwart their master plan?
hg
3 years ago
homeless
Ha, Ha, Please check out "Gracie's finger", and see what real life politicians will do to hang on to their seats, hahaha
alive
3 years ago
Update please
Would it be so terrible if some people got a chance to make a bit of extra money by going door to door enumerating?
Seems to me that our governemnts are doing their best to not provide any jobs at any level.
Another item is that once on a voters list, people never seem to get removed even if they moved out of the provinces ages ago.
cboo44
3 years ago
Voter ID Conspiracy
Funny how people who actually care about voting, are committed to voting, are realistic about being informed, don't have any problems, or if they do, they adapt and overcome those problems. They must think it is important enough to do in a methodical way.
"The world is run by those who show up."
Rod Smelser
3 years ago
VOTER FRAUD
Some months ago I came across a study done by American political scientists on the subject of election night voter fraud. The idea is that on election night, parties will hold back some results until the rest of the result in a district is known, and then magically supply just enough votes to win by a very small margin.
They found using statistical methods that both the US and Canada had significant amounts of election night voter fraud.
So, any idea that there is absolutely no need for controls on who votes is one I don't agree with.
TYRONE
3 years ago
VOTING RULES
THE MORE I READ THE ANGRIER I GET, BECAUSE I REMEMBER THE STUPID HASSLE I WAS SUBJECTED TO.
#1) I SHOWED UP AT THE POLLS, WHICH WERE NOT IN THEIR FAMILIAR PLACE AND I HAD TO ASK SOME PEOPLE FOR DIRECTIONS.
#2) I WAS AWARE OF THE ID REQUIREMENT AND PRODUCED MY BC DRIVER'S LICENCE, WHICH HAD MY PICTURE, MY ADDRESS AND MY SIGNATURE ON IT, BUT I WAS REFUSED A BALLOT!
#3) THEY WANTED A SECOND ID WITH MY ADDRESS AND MY PICTURE ON IT!!!
I ASK YOU: DOES ANYONE HAVE, MUCH LESS CARRY A SECOND SUCH ID???
#4) FUMING AND EXTREMELY ANGRY AT SUCH STUPIDITY BY PEOPLE WHO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER, I GRABBED THE OFFERED PIECE OF PAPER ON WHICH I HAD TO PUT THE VERY SAME INFORMATION AS WAS SHOWN ON MY FIRST ID AND SIGN IT BEFORE THEY GAVE ME MY BALLOT. NO WONDER, THAT MANY PEOPLE DO NOT BOTHER TO VOTE ANYMORE, BECAUSE THE INCOMPETENCE IS ABSOLUTELY MIND BOGGLING!!!
AND WHAT DO WE GET FOR ALL THIS TROUBLE?
THE PRIVILEDGE TO PAY OVER 300 MILLION DOLLARS FOR NO CHANGE IN THE STATUS QUO!!!
NO WONDER THEY DO NOT TRUST US WITH GUN OWNERSHIP, BECAUSE WE ARE CONFRONTED WITH THE MOST ASININE CROP OF HOMO SAPIENS EVER.
For a better world
3 years ago
ID Requirements
To give myself some background about the election process, I worked at a fairly large polling station during the last federal election. No one, who was a voter within the poll boundaries, was unable to vote.
Staff at Elections Canada emphasized to their employees that every effort should be made to ensure eligible citizens were able to vote.
Elections Canada requires the following ID:
http://www.elections.ca/home.asp
Proof of identity and residence
If the poll clerk determines that the elector’s name and address appear on the list of electors or that the elector is allowed to vote under section 146, 147, 148 or 149, then, subject to subsection (3), the elector shall provide to the deputy returning officer and the poll clerk the following proof of his or her identity and residence:
(a) one piece of identification issued by a Canadian government, whether federal, provincial or local, or an agency of that government, that contains a photograph of the elector and his or her name and address; or
(b) two pieces of identification authorized by the Chief Electoral Officer each of which establish the elector’s name and at least one of which establishes the elector’s address.
The polling station was busy all day with a huge surge between 5PM and 7PM.
There were people who came to the wrong poll and were redirected to a nearby station. Several of voters who came without adeqate ID were able to vote.
Many of those who came after at the last minute had been called by the candidates representative. The only difficult individuals were a couple of the scrutineers (one conservative and one Liberal).
There maybe ultierior motives of the incumbant government, but none were apparent at the polling station I worked at.
RickW
3 years ago
Our very own fiddling
Harper is just pi$$ed because we don't have chads to hang, so he has to find some other way.......
tom.boushel
3 years ago
New Voting Rules Disenfranchises Natives
The worst effect of this No Po Box rule is that it automatically disenfranchised 10`s of thousands of Canada`s 1st Nations citizens who live on reservations with no street address system and whose ID`s and mail only has a PO Box number and a towns name and postal code.
This was a Conservative Plan to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Canadians who would normally not vote for Harper. This was a plan concocted by Harper`s main adviser Professor Thomas Flanagan, Canada`s own Karl Rove.
All Canadians deserve better! This is discrimination pure and simple. Where are our defenders of the democratic process.
siNistar
3 years ago
Don't Vote
You can always chose not to vote as I have. I do not consent to be governed by a corrupt first-past-the-post system that has remained virtually unreformed since it's inception and is designed to benefit incumbents. Furthermore, political parties are simply there to divide the people as this quote aplies quite nicely:
By dividing the voters through the political party system, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.'
- USA Banker's Magazine, August 25 1924
RickW
3 years ago
No Vote....
....is the same as a vote for Harper, as most who don't vote, wouldn't have voted Conservative, had they voted.
If you want to protest, then vote the Danny Williams ticket: Anyone But Conservative (or Liberal)
Innocent Bystander
3 years ago
Damn it
Can only vote once now.
reallife
3 years ago
Too paranoid
I will believe all the conspiracy theories posted here when I see a list previous voters who were prohibited from voting by the new rules. I suspect the homeless are not regular voters. However, I do recognize that Innocent Bystander will have been shut out of an opportunity or two (vote early and often).
G West
3 years ago
reallife
Do you dispute the fact that voter turnout has been diminishing over the period since door to door enumeration was ended?
Do you really believe there was an issue with voter fraud?
Do you think we have a working democracy now?
reallife
3 years ago
G west
Q. Do you dispute the fact that voter turnout has been diminishing over the period since door to door enumeration was ended?
A. No, nor would I dispute the fact that voter turnout would be diminishing if this change was not made.
Q. Do you really believe there was an issue with voter fraud?
A. If there was, it is certainly less now.
Q. Do you think we have a working democracy now?
A. We can be very proud of our democracy and it was not damaged by requiring a voter to verify idenity.
G West
3 years ago
Actually on the first point
Bruce Hicks, a political scientist at the Université de Montréal, has written that:
"The very act of going door-to-door had a mobilizing effect... "It adds to your likelihood of going out to vote."
In Vancouver Centre the decline in the number of voters was a more modest 700 compared to 2006, perhaps owing to the highly competitive four-way race that evolved there. Elections Canada reports almost 4,000 fewer registered voters in the riding compared to the 2000 election, while the riding's population has grown by 8,000 people in that time, suggesting that many new residents in the riding were not added to the voter list, while at the same time voters who left the riding or died were not replaced on the list. The declining number of registered voters per capita is a recurring theme in ridings across the country.
Elections Canada stopped sending enumerators door-to-door in the 1990s. It relies today instead on individuals to voluntarily add their names to the voters list when they fill out their income tax forms. Hicks says this method systematically disenfranchises people who move frequently, especially young people, renters and new immigrants.
The old system of door-to-door enumeration also encouraged people to show up at the polls.
G West
3 years ago
On the second and third points
I don't consider this:
If there was, it is certainly less now.
Is any kind of a relevant response. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary - and no one has provided any - neither statement is valid.
Therefore, since there was no fraud to be addressed - according to the officials at Election Canada - the whole exercise was little more than another attempt by Pee Wee to cater to his racist and prejudiced base.
As for the final point, how anyone can be proud of a democracy which has, in the last year, seen:
(a) A Prime Minister lie, cheat and fail to live up to his promises (and his own law) relative to fixed election dates;
(b) Another Government elected which has less support than the opposition by a factor of 2; and
(c) A Prime Minister ignore the parliamentary customs and practices of the country by failing to bow to the will of parliament.
We have nothing to be proud of and much for which to be ashamed.
G West
3 years ago
On the voters list issue
If you prefer something a little more definitive, I can provide that for you too:
http://www.irpp.org/newsroom/archive/2003/082103e.pdf
G West
3 years ago
Or something from the popular press
http://www.macleans.ca/columnists/article.jsp?content=20070115_139312_139312
G West
3 years ago
Perhaps an American academic study
http://www.tobinproject.org/welcome/downloads/IOD_Mandated_Voter_Registration.pdf
Let me know when you're convinced
morechatter
3 years ago
All these changes
But nothing has changed has it as wasn't done to ensure all parties got their fair share of the votes during election. But to ensure they didn't as there was no doubt their X was not slated for theConservative Party as their politics put many a citizen to the street across the country. I believe the Liberals are hoping for the same outcome that those they have been busy doing in don't do them in during election.
G West
3 years ago
morechatter
I agree with your equation:
Conservatives = Liberals.
The citizen = 0