Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is calling for a limit to how many people can be on a ballot as dozens of candidates are running against him in an upcoming by-election, but political scientists say long ballots likely won’t make a difference in election results.
He is running for election in the federal riding of Battle River-Crowfoot in Alberta, which is considered a safe area for Conservatives. The MP who won that seat during the federal election in February, now-former Conservative MP Damien Kurek, stepped down in June in order to allow Poilievre to run.
Read More
Poillievre lost his seat in the Carleton riding to Liberal candidate Bruce Fanjoy, during an election with over 90 candidates in that riding. Poilievre had previously represented that area as MP for 20 years.
“We have to take action because this is a scam. It is unfair, it is unjust, and it must stop,” Poilievre told an audience during a town hall in Stettler, AB, last week.
However, the politician is not the only one vying for a seat. Electoral reform advocacy group Longest Ballot Committee (LBC) shared that there are 59 people registered as candidates in Battle River-Crowfoot in Alberta.
Poilievre offered suggestions for limiting the number of candidates on a ballot, including requiring each person to receive 1,000 signatures from people in the community before being added, and limiting people to being allowed to sign only one petition.
Read More
“That would make it impossible for 200 people to go out and have their names piled onto the list,” he said.
Currently, candidates must get 100 signatures from voters in their riding, and people can sign multiple petitions.
On May 3, LBC said that if they received emails from at least 200 people interested in running as a candidate, it would “do the funny” in the riding Poilievre is running in. Then, on May 8, the committee made another post sharing that they had been contacted by more than 500 people.
In a statement posted online on July 16, the group said that Poilievre’s proposed requirement to have 1,000 independent signatures would have a profound and negative impact on Canadian democracy.
“In most of Canada it would turn every election into a two-party race, and in safe ridings, like Battle-River Crowfoot, we would likely see no election at all, races would simply be won by acclamation,” the statement reads.
“This ill-conceived and self-serving electoral reform proposal by the leader of the opposition is downright dangerous, and reinforces our conviction that politicians are not well suited to decide the rules of their own elections.”
POLITICAL SCIENTISTS SAY LONG BALLOT WON’T RUIN HIS CHANCES
While Poilievre is calling for changes, political scientists in Toronto say that this long ballot does not really pose a risk to his chances of winning.
Professor and Chair of York University’s Department of Politics Dr. Dennis Pilon, says that the LBC has been clear that the long ballots are a protest, but they aren’t alone in being frustrated with the system. Pilon explained that many Canadians have raised concerns about the country’s electoral system, saying that it’s not very representative or competitive.
“Various groups have tried to get the politicians to change these rules, but they refuse to do so, and the reasons that they offer are often pretty self-serving,” Pilon told Now Toronto.
“So, this is a classic protest. This is a group of citizens saying, we can’t get the politicians to do what appears to be the right thing, we can’t get them to step away and let a group of people who aren’t directly affected, not in a conflict of interest, make the decision. So, we are going to protest.”
Pilon says the group’s strategy is working, in a limited way.
“It’s drawing attention to the issue that they think is important, it is making some of the politicians nervous,” he explained.
“That comes back to the complaints that the long ballot group has about our present voting system: if you have a lot of different candidates on the ballot, it’s possible that the votes that are cast for those candidates could make the difference between a winner and loser.”
“I think the thinking of the LBC is if the politicians have to suffer from the wonkiness of the current voting system, maybe they’ll think again about change.”
And the risks, he says, are low.
“The chances that the public will be confused by this ballot are very, very low because the politicians, of course, have considerable resources to promote name recognition.”
He explained that while Canada has had some serious election interference, pointing to a 2011 scandal where some political actors paid for automated calls that confused voters about polling locations.
“That’s not the limit of the kind of shady behaviour that’s gone on in Canadian elections. That’s where the real problems are,” he explained. “In this case, the risks to the public are extremely low.”
Dr. Lewis Krashinsky is a post-doctoral fellow with the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto. He calls the LBC’s tactics clever.
“It’s definitely one of the more interesting protests that has arisen in Canada over the last few years, just because it’s clever, in a way, because they’re following rules, and drawing the ire of mainstream politicians,” he told Now Toronto.
“[Poilievre] is calling it a scam, he is complaining about it, saying it’s unfair, and that’s just going to embolden these guys. Because the point of the protest is to poke and prod politicians, and they’re certainly effective at doing so.”
Krashinsky shared that the real harm is to smaller candidates, who may not have the name recognition to stand out on a ballot with many candidates, but both he and Pilon say it won’t harm Poilievre’s chances of winning in the upcoming election.
CANADIANS REACT
Online, some people are agreeing with Poilievre, sharing their ideas on how to change the process of running for Parliament.
“Each candidate should have to come with a $100k qualifying fee where funds would be distributed among the 10 legitimate charities,” one person suggested on X.
“Not only must this process be outlawed immediately…it must be taken as election interference and ALL of those responsible imprisoned for very long periods of time,” another said.
While others say they don’t understand why people are taking such an issue with the long ballot.
“I live in a riding that had the longest ballot protest last year in a by-election. The ballot had 84 people on it. While a bit cumbersome behind the voting wall, it didn’t make voting any more difficult,” one person said on Reddit. “I knew who I was voting for and found their name on the sheet.”
“Pierre is very well known and pretty much everyone who looks at the ballot will see and notice his name there easily. This should only hurt any serious independent running,” another said.
While others feel as though Poilievre being able to run in the riding is a problem in itself.
“This is another thing that is broken about our system. What’s the point of having electoral districts if anyone can show up,” one Redditor said. “Parties should not be able to parachute anyone and block local candidates from running. I think that having your primary residence in the district should be a requirement.”
Constituents in Battle River-Crowfoot will head to the polls on Aug. 18.
