ANNUAL REPORT 2011/2012 Report by the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario
51 Rolark Drive Toronto, Ontario M1R 3B1 1.888.668.8683 TTY: 1.888.292.2312 info@elections.on.ca elections.on.ca ISSN 1923-6956 (Online)
Office of the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario Bureau du directeur général des élections de l Ontario The Honourable Dave Levac Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Room 180, Legislative Building, Queen s Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A2 Dear Mr. Speaker, It is my pleasure to submit the annual report covering the affairs of my office under the Election Act and Election Finances Act during the 2011 / 2012 fiscal year. In this period, my office delivered the 2011 General Election and has prepared for a constant state of readiness to administer a by-election or a general election on relatively short notice. Sincerely, Greg Essensa Chief Electoral Officer
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER........................5 WHAT WE DID IN 2011 2012........................................... 7 HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OF THE ELECTION.............................................. 7 ELECTION FINANCE ACTIVITIES.................................................... 14 OVERVIEW OF COMPLIANCE ISSUES.................................................21 PREPARING FOR A CONSTANT STATE OF ELECTION READINESS....................... 23 WHERE WE ARE GOING...............................................25 INTRODUCTION................................................................... 25 GUIDELINES FOR LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS....................................... 26 RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS........................................ 26 CONCLUSION..................................................................... 33 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS..............................................35 APPENDIX A.........................................................63 OVERVIEW OF ELECTIONS ONTARIO APPENDIX B.........................................................67 REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2011 APPENDIX C.........................................................69 REQUESTS TO REGISTER THE NAME OF A NEW POLITICAL PARTY DURING 2011 APPENDIX D......................................................... 71 REGISTERED CONSTITUENCY ASSOCIATION CHANGES BY PARTY DURING 2011 APPENDIX E.........................................................73 DESCRIPTION OF FINANCIAL RETURNS AND CONTRIBUTION LIMITS APPENDIX F.........................................................74 SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL DATA, AS FILED, EXTRACTED FROM REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES 2011 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS APPENDIX G.........................................................77 LIST OF REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES WHO WERE LATE FILING THEIR 2011 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS APPENDIX H.........................................................78 SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL DATA, AS FILED, EXTRACTED FROM REGISTERED CONSTITUENCY ASSOCIATIONS 2011 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS APPENDIX I.......................................................... 81 LIST OF REGISTERED CONSTITUENCY ASSOCIATIONS WHO WERE LATE OR DID NOT FILE THEIR 2011 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 3
APPENDIX J.........................................................84 SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL DATA, AS FILED, EXTRACTED FROM REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES CAMPAIGN PERIOD FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE 2011 GENERAL ELECTION APPENDIX K.........................................................87 LIST OF REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES WHO WERE LATE FILING THEIR 2011 CAMPAIGN PERIOD FINANCIAL STATEMENTS APPENDIX L.........................................................89 SUMMARY OF CANDIDATES AND CONSTITUENCY ASSOCIATIONS INCOME AND EXPENSES, FOR THE 2011 GENERAL ELECTION APPENDIX M......................................................... 111 LIST OF CANDIDATES AND REGISTERED CONSTITUENCY ASSOCIATIONS WHO WERE LATE OR DID NOT FILE THEIR 2011 CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS APPENDIX N........................................................ 122 SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL DATA EXTRACTED FROM REGISTERED THIRD PARTIES ADVERTISING REPORTS FOR THE 2011 GENERAL ELECTION APPENDIX O........................................................ 125 LIST OF REGISTERED THIRD PARTIES WHO WERE LATE FILING THEIR 2011 ADVERTISING REPORT APPENDIX P........................................................ 127 SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS PREVIOUSLY RECOMMENDED THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN ENACTED 4
MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER When I look back at the work that Elections Ontario completed this past year, I am filled with a sense of excitement for the transformation that is beginning to occur to Ontario s provincial electoral process. With the successful delivery of the 2011 General Election, Elections Ontario demonstrated that it is possible to make changes and to put the needs of electors first, without sacrificing integrity. Special ballots, assistive voting technology, hospital and home visits, all helped to provide choice to electors in how they cast their ballots. Our rebranded approach to communications and revamped outreach strategy informed electors, in an easy to understand format, of who, how, where and when they could vote. While I am proud of what we have accomplished, there is still more work to be done. We need to continue to break down potential barriers to the voting process and balance the responsibility of delivering accessible elections to all Ontarians with a more flexible administrative model that ensures the integrity of the process. Detailed information about the preparation and the delivery of the 40 th Provincial General Election can be found in my previously submitted report entitled TellMeAboutThe2011OntarioElection.ca. The outcome of the 2011 General Election was the election of a minority government the first in 25 years. We had to immediately adapt and transform our internal planning process to be in a constant state of election readiness, instead of having approximately four years to prepare. The move to more days and ways for voting further complicated the election readiness planning since we are required to provide electors with a special ballot the day after the writs are issued. The impact of the need to be election ready for a call at any time cannot be overstated it has caused a paradigm shift to all aspects of our planning and budgeting processes. With this paradigm shift comes a great opportunity for Elections Ontario to further refine and perfect our management frameworks. Over the course of the next twelve months, we will be undertaking a strategic planning exercise and will be releasing our new strategic plan in 2013. Our need to be in a constant state of election readiness can be used as a catalyst for our future modernization efforts. In looking to the future, this report ends with a section on the legislative change that is required to build toward a longer-term vision for elections in Ontario that would truly put the elector first. Working with all of our partners, we can make the changes that modernize the electoral process and make Ontario a leader in the field of election management. Greg Essensa Chief Electoral Officer 5
6
WHAT WE DID IN 2011 2012 We have grouped the activities of the organization into four broad categories that will be discussed in greater detail in this section. The four categories are: High Level Review of the 2011 General Election Election Finance Activities Overview of Compliance Issues Preparing for Constant State of Election Readiness HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OF THE 2011 GENERAL ELECTION Delivering an election in Ontario is a tremendous, multi-faceted undertaking. We are required to connect more than 8.5 million electors with approximately 8,000 voting locations that are staffed by more than 70,000 election workers. Elections Ontario administers elections through a decentralized system with 107 returning officers and 107 election clerks one for each of the Province s electoral districts. For the 2011 General Election, we built a solid foundation for an accessible and customer service driven election by applying government best practices in the areas of project management as well as governance and accountability frameworks. Where possible, we have been working to build stronger relationships, and in some cases establishing partnerships, with entities within the broader Ontario Public Service. For example, by July 2011, we had fully migrated our data centre to the Ontario Ministry of Government Services new, high security Guelph Data Centre. We have also adopted Ontario Public Service best practices in procurement and have been able to take advantage of the government s approved vendor lists. This has allowed us to reduce our procurement timelines and to achieve significant cost efficiencies. Our efforts resulted in an election that had: More days and ways to vote In 2011, for the first time, electors could cast a ballot over a 28-day period, using a variety of options. Beginning the day after the writs were issued, electors had two more ways to vote, using a special ballot either in person at their local returning office or by mail-in ballot. In addition, for the first time, Returning Officers had the ability to move advance polls from location to location for different lengths of time which provided added flexibility and choice to electors seeking an advance voting option. 7
Focus on accessibility For the 2011 General Election, Elections Ontario worked to make Ontario s provincial voting process more accessible. Our comprehensive accessibility program aimed to ensure that accessibility was incorporated into all aspects of our business, from conception to implementation. Because of the changes introduced in the Election Statute Law Amendment Act, 2010, we were able to remove some barriers to voting by introducing new services such as home visits, hospital visits and assistive voting technology. As required by the changes in legislation, we also attempted to remove physical barriers through a comprehensive review of potential voting locations. Across the province, in late 2010 and early 2011, returning officers and their teams inspected more than 11,000 potential locations. On April 6, 2011, six months before the election, the list of proposed voting locations was posted to our website for public review. These efforts to comply with the new legislation resulted in voting being held in many non traditional locations across the province such as grocery stores and shopping centres. For our efforts at integrating accessibility into our policies, procedures and services, Elections Ontario was honoured with a 2011 Excellence Canada Accessibility Award for commitment to excellent customer service for people with disabilities. In July 2012, the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) honoured the vendor that we collaborated with to create our accessible customer service training videos. Our accessible customer service training videos won two awards: one for excellence in video production, and a second for media that influences employee behaviour. Focus on putting the elector first As we continued our transformation into an organization that recognizes the importance of quality customer service and places the needs of our stakeholders first, we reached out to a number of groups well in advance of Election Day to get input on the needs of their stakeholders and to find effective ways of keeping them informed. Our outreach and communication efforts helped to ensure that all interested parties had the tools and information that they needed to participate in the election. We used both traditional communication channels (paid print, radio and television advertisements) as well as new channels (such as Twitter and Facebook) to make electors aware of the opportunities to take part in the election, and to ensure that they knew that participating would be easy, no matter who they were or where they were located. 8
The 2011 General Election More Days, More Ways: Elections Ontario Makes Voting Easy media campaign was honoured with an IABC Ovation Award of Excellence and a Canadian Public Relations Society (CPRS) Ace Award. Our award-winning, proactive regional media relations campaign was designed to inform voters of the many days and ways available for voting in the provincial general election. Combining a regional media road tour with proactive pitches, editorial board meetings and a webcast media event, the More Days, More Ways campaign provided the opportunity to reach communities and media outlets outside of the GTA and to effectively convey Elections Ontario s message. In addition, our rebranding efforts which featured a wide variety of elements including ads and signage, tote bags, online tools and illustrated maps won a Gold Pencil in the Corporate Identity category at the prestigious One Show international design competition. The 2011 General Election was a record-breaking event in terms of political activity. There were 655 candidate names on the 107 ballots across Ontario. This is the largest number of candidates to run in any provincial election since Confederation. In addition, by the end of the nomination period, eight new political parties had registered, bringing the total number of registered political parties in Ontario up to twenty-one. The significant increase in the number of registered political parties may be partly attributed to changes that were made to the legislation in 2007. At that time, the rules were revised to make it easier for political parties to register. A prospective political party has two methods available to them. During a campaign period, a political party intending to register needs to nominate, endorse and complete the required paperwork to run candidates in at least two electoral districts. At any time other than a campaign period, a political party intending to register must submit a petition to the Chief Electoral Officer with the names, addresses and signatures of at least 1,000 eligible voters who endorse the registration of the political party. 9
The following table summarizes the number of registered candidates for each political party: Political Party Affiliation of Registered Candidates In 2011 Party Abbreviated Party Name Number of Registered Candidates Canadians Choice Party Canadians Choice Party 3 Communist Party of Canada (Ontario) Communist 9 Family Coalition Party of Ontario Family Coalition Party of Ontario 31 Freedom Party of Ontario Freedom Party of Ontario 57 Green Party of Ontario Green Party of Ontario 107 New Democratic Party of Ontario Ontario NDP/NPD 107 Northern Ontario Heritage Party Northern Ontario Heritage Party 3 Ontario Liberal Party Ontario Liberal Party 107 Ontario Libertarian Party Ontario Libertarian Party 51 Ontario Provincial Confederation of Regions Party Ontario Provincial Confederation of Regions Party Paramount Canadians Party Paramount Canadians Party 4 Party for Human Rights in Ontario Party for Human Rights in Ontario 2 Party for People with Special Needs Party for People with Special Needs 4 Pauper Party of Ontario Paupers 2 People First Republic Party of Ontario People First Republic Party of Ontario 3 Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario PC Party of Ontario 107 Reform Party of Ontario Reform Party of Ontario 4 Socialist Party of Ontario Socialist Party of Ontario 5 The Only Party TOP 3 The Peoples Political Party The People 4 Vegan Environmental Party Vegan Environmental Party 3 Independents 35 Total 654 3 Candidates who registered and subsequently withdrew 14 Candidates who were nominated and did not register 1 Total number of Parties 21 Independent candidates 35 Total number of candidates as above 654 10
Political Party Affiliation of Registered Candidates in 2011 The election also had the largest number of registered third party advertisers in Ontario since the passage of third party advertising rules in 2007. There were 22 registered third party advertisers (listed below) who spent $6,084,470 on political advertisements. Registered Third Parties for the October 6, 2011 General Election Campaign for Public Education Inc. Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 4400 (CUPE 4400) Canadian Union of Public Employees, Ontario Division (CUPE ONTARIO) Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association Sudbury Elementary Unit Ontario Pipe Trades Council Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association Contractors of the Ontario Electrical League Ontario Regional Common Ground Alliance Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario People for a Better Ontario FundHer.ca People for a Progressive Ottawa Lincoln, Welland and Haldimand Building and Construction Trades Council Political Action Committee National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW Canada) Quinte St. Lawrence Building Trades Council Political Action Committee Service Employees International Union Local 1 Canada Ontarians for Responsible Government Time For Change Ontario Ontario Clean Air Alliance Vaughan Professional Fire Fighters Association The Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association Working Families 11
On Election Day, Elections Ontario hosted a group of international observers who were interested in learning more about our services and initiatives. Representatives from Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, the United States (Chicago and Kansas), as well as from other Canadian electoral agencies (such as Elections Canada, Elections BC, Elections Saskatchewan, Elections Nova Scotia, and Elections Nunavut) participated in workshops and travelled to returning offices and voting locations to observe how the day unfolded. Observing how other jurisdictions administer their elections is a beneficial learning opportunity and chance to gain insight into how other organizations have responded to common challenges and trends, and share best practices. Another method that Elections Ontario uses to learn and share is through involvement in professional organizations and conferences. Our staff are involved with the Conference of Canadian Election Officials, the International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers (IACREOT) and the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws (COGEL). In December 2011, the Chief Electoral Officer was appointed as President-elect of COGEL. 12
Election Budget The following table sets out the actual costs of the 2011 General Election. Please note that the costs indicated below under the 2011 GE Actuals column are the complete costs for the 2011 election and include costs incurred in previous fiscal years as well as forecasts for certain line items not yet paid. These are a subset of the total expenditures of Elections Ontario on page 39. Headquarters Salaries & Benefits April 2011 Cost Estimate July 2012 Cost Estimate 2011 GE Actuals Salaries & Benefits $5,673,787 $6,428,027 $7,411,356 Transportation & Communication Services Employee Travel $1,985,940 $985,960 $785,329 Mail, Courier, Telecom $7,140,122 $6,788,269 $6,756,726 Consulting (includes Legal) $3,113,675 $2,020,495 $2,606,541 Facilities $938,443 $49,912 $57,478 Supplies & Equipment Furniture & Equipment (includes Assistive Technology) $2,423,599 $500,118 $7,249 Supplies & Sundry $3,783,181 $2,020,495 $2,088,938 Rentals $2,751,106 $4,646,029 $4,761,966 Advertising & Communication (includes Notice of Registration Card) Other Services $7,088,208 $4,449,696 $4,452,779 $864,037 $152,388 $175,478 Subtotal Headquarters $35,762,098 $28,041,389 $29,103,840 Electoral District Field Budget Administration of Returning Offices $17,274,803 $16,257,086 $15,368,594 Advance Polls $4,960,564 $4,578,507 $4,638,271 Polling Day $20,360,182 $16,715,753 $17,494,855 Printing $900,000 $923,080 $1,208,538 Revision Personnel $4,014,323 $1,338,673 $1,958,854 Special Ballot $2,134,558 $1,679,604 $1,391,070 Preliminary Duties $618,956 $618,956 $618,956 Subtotal Electoral District Field $50,263,386 $42,111,659 $42,679,138 Election Finances Audit & Election Subsidies $5,517,427 $7,468,612 $ 7,468,612 Subtotal Election Finances $ 5,517,427 $7,468,612 $ 7,468,612 Totals $91,542,911 $77,621,660 $79,251,589 13
ELECTION FINANCE ACTIVITIES Under the Election Finances Act, the Chief Electoral Officer is responsible for overseeing the registration of Ontario s political parties, constituency associations, candidates, leadership contestants, and third parties. Our office is also responsible for reviewing financial statements to ensure compliance with the limits on contributions and campaign expenses, distributing subsidies for audit and campaign expenses, issuing tax credit receipts for contributions to parties, constituency associations and candidates and publishing on the Internet the contributions made to political parties as well as the financial statements of all the registrants under the Election Finances Act. With the 2011 General Election, a number of activities took place under the Election Finances Act. This section of the report will provide: a high level overview of the election finances activities for the 2011 General Election, and an account of the public funding provided for certain expenses. More detailed Election Finances Act information can be found in the report appendices. The appendices include: Appendix B Registered Political Parties as of December 31, 2011 Appendix C Requests to Register the Name of a New Political Party During 2011 Appendix D Registered Constituency Association Changes by Party During 2011 Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J Appendix K Description of Financial Returns and Contribution Limits Summary of Financial Data, as filed, Extracted from Registered Political Parties 2011 Annual Financial Statements List of Registered Political Parties who were late filing their 2011 Annual Financial Statements Summary of Financial Data, as filed, Extracted from Registered Constituency Associations 2011 Annual Financial Statements List of Registered Constituency Associations who were late or did not file their 2011 Annual Financial Statements Summary of Financial Data, as filed, Extracted from Registered Political Parties Campaign Period Financial Statements for the 2011 General Election List of Registered Political Parties who were late filing their 2011 Campaign Period Financial Statements 14
Appendix L Appendix M Appendix N Appendix O Appendix P Summary of Candidates and Constituency Associations Income and, for the 2011 General Election List of Candidates and Registered Constituency Associations who were late or did not file their 2011 Campaign Statements Summary of Financial Data Extracted from Registered Third Parties Advertising Reports for the 2011 General Election List of Registered Third Parties who were late filing their 2011 Advertising Report Summary of Legislative Amendments Previously Recommended that Have Not Yet Been Enacted OVERVIEW Elections Ontario helps registered political entities meet their obligations under the Election Finances Act. As part of this effort, our staff spent the past two years clarifying and simplifying the guidelines and training materials we provide to political parties, constituency associations, candidates, leadership contestants and registered third party advertisers. The effort spent in consulting with stakeholders in developing and rolling out the revised products was appreciated. In the post-election survey, nine out of ten CFOs commented favourably on the service and information they received. Our online financial resources, including the website and email support, were also rated very highly by CFOs, with 83% saying they are excellent or good. In terms of a summary of the political campaign financial activity for the 2011 General Election, the two tables below summarize the campaign contributions and expenses. 15
Summary Table: 2011 campaign period contributions received by registered parties and by candidates/constituency associations (combined) Party Canadians Choice Party Communist Party of Canada (Ontario) Family Coalition Party of Ontario Freedom Party of Ontario Green Party of Ontario New Democratic Party of Ontario Northern Ontario Heritage Party Ontario Liberal Party Ontario Libertarian Party Ontario Provincial Confederation of Regions Party Paramount Canadians Party Party for Human Rights in Ontario Party for People with Special Needs Pauper Party of Ontario People First Republic Party of Ontario Source of Contributions Individuals $ Corporations $ Trade Unions $ Total $ Total $ 138.88 - - 138.88 Average $ 46.29 - - Total $ 23,257.00 - - 23,257.00 Average $ 234.92 - - Total $ 78,890.99 2,600.00-81,490.99 Average $ 192.42 371.43 - Total $ 22,330.01 704.00-23,034.01 Average $ 178.64 176.00 - Total $ 416,334.43 50,397.48 100.00 466,831.91 Average $ 166.53 775.35 100.00 Total $ 2,267,901.11 345,137.18 812,726.20 3,425,764.49 Average $ 177.29 917.91 975.66 Total $ 3,767.12 - - 3,767.12 Average $ 753.42 - - Total $ 3,782,915.84 3,379,134.79 1,002,261.49 8,164,312.12 Average $ 263.14 1,239.13 1,132.50 Total $ 10,462.67 5,148.95-15,611.62 Average $ 116.25 1,029.79 - Total $ 1,503.10 100.00-1,603.10 Average $ 115.62 100.00 - Total $ 12,157.00 2,400.00-14,557.00 Average $ 715.12 1,200.00 - Total $ - - - - Average $ - - - Total $ - - - - Average $ - - - Total $ - - - - Average $ - - - Total $ 1,600.00 4,000.00-5,600.00 Average $ 533.33 1,000.00-16
Party Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario Reform Party of Ontario Socialist Party of Ontario The Only Party The Peoples Political Party Vegan Environmental Party Source of Contributions Individuals $ Corporations $ Trade Unions $ Total $ Total $ 4,240,315.07 3,881,908.95 4,634.00 8,126,858.02 Average $ 202.87 1,135.06 662.00 Total $ 4,725.50 9,640.00-14,365.50 Average $ 152.44 1,606.67 - Total $ 3,999.81 - - 3,999.81 Average $ 222.21 - - Total $ 915.00 - - 915.00 Average $ 457.50 - - Total $ 1,240.00 - - 1,240.00 Average $ 1,240.00 - - Total $ 372.00 - - 372.00 Average $ 372.00 - - Total Contributions Total $ 10,872,825.53 7,681,171.35 1,819,721.69 20,373,718.57 17
Summary Table: 2011 campaign expense limits and subject to limit expenses Party Number of Electors Entitled to Vote Where party fielded a candidate Where party received 15% of votes Expense Limitation Parties Subject to Limit Candidates & Constituency Associations Expense Limitation Subject to Limit Canadians Choice Party 255,366-188,970.84 4.00 303,885.54 98.88 Communist Party of Canada (Ontario) Family Coalition Party of Ontario 774,168-572,884.32 15,360.00 921,259.92 594.11 2,593,650-1,919,301.00 53,871.00 3,095,123.50 59,434.07 Freedom Party of Ontario 4,851,373-3,590,016.02 22,437.00 5,781,813.87 1,903.01 Green Party of Ontario 9,000,374-6,660,276.76 168,331.00 10,771,205.06 403,941.21 New Democratic Party of Ontario 9,000,374 6,590,138 6,660,276.76 2,504,563.00 10,771,205.06 3,052,109.23 Northern Ontario Heritage Party 184,387-136,446.38-236,780.53 3,570.00 Ontario Liberal Party 9,000,374 8,902,281 6,660,276.76 5,800,142.00 10,771,205.06 5,672,027.44 Ontario Libertarian Party 4,520,106-3,344,878.44 580.00 5,387,606.00 13,206.54 Ontario Provincial Confederation of Regions Party 282,892-209,340.08 8.00 336,641.48 1,166.00 Paramount Canadians Party 307,931-227,868.94 185.00 366,437.89 14,776.00 Party for Human Rights in Ontario Party for People with Special Needs 178,581-132,149.94-212,511.39-374,363-277,028.62-445,491.97 - Pauper Party of Ontario 186,362-137,908-221,771 - People First Republic Party of Ontario Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario 276,134-204,339-328,599 6,234.68 9,000,374 8,262,152 6,660,276.76 6,323,097.00 10,771,205.06 6,103,135.34 Reform Party of Ontario 368,859-272,955.66-438,942.21 18,083.69 Socialist Party of Ontario 450,138-333,102.12 156.00 535,664.22 1,678.53 The Only Party 219,277-162,264.98-260,939.63 673.77 The Peoples Political Party 337,952-250,084.48-402,162.88 431.59 Vegan Environmental Party 256,767-190,007.58-305,552.73 135.60 Independents 3,039,238-2,249,036.12-3,616,693.22 28,146.26 18
PUBLIC FUNDING OF EXPENSES The Chief Electoral Officer provides reimbursement for certain expenses: Audit subsidy The Election Finances Act provides for the Chief Electoral Officer to subsidize the cost of auditors services for the examination and reporting on the financial statements by paying to the auditor the lesser of the total auditor s fee and an indexed amount. The indexed amount is amended every five years and is currently $1,488 for political party financial statements, $744 for constituency association financial statements, $1,240 for candidate campaign financial statements, and $992 for leadership contestants. During the 2011 2012 fiscal year, the Chief Electoral Officer paid out $344,821 in audit subsidies. Campaign expense subsidies Campaign subsidies are paid to each candidate who received at least 15 per cent of the popular vote in his or her electoral district. The subsidy paid is the lesser of 20 per cent of the expense limit in that electoral district or 20 per cent of the actual subject to limit campaign expenses that were paid. In addition, campaign subsidies are paid to parties whose candidates received at least 15 per cent of the popular vote in any electoral district. The party subsidy is calculated by multiplying by $0.05 the number of electors entitled to vote in each electoral district where the party received at least 15 per cent of the popular vote. Campaign expense subsidies relating to the 2011 General Election totalled $3,275,463 to the 283 eligible candidates and $1,187,729 to three of the twenty-one parties. 19
Forfeitures of contributions The Chief Electoral Officer received $26,757 in forfeiture of contributions during the fiscal year 2011 2012. The table below summarizes the 2011 General Election campaign entitlements and subsidies. Summary Table: 2011 General Election campaign entitlements and subsidies 1 Party Parties Candidates Auditors Subsidy Maximum Subsidy Subsidy Payment Subsidy Payments Canadians Choice Party 3,842.00 Communist Party of Canada (Ontario) 7,881.39 Family Coalition Party of Ontario 36,044.64 Freedom Party of Ontario 18,176.30 Green Party of Ontario 155,544.42 New Democratic Party of Ontario 329,506.90 1,641,364.84 623,095.24 210,056.00 Northern Ontario Heritage Party 5,239.30 Ontario Liberal Party 445,114.00 2,170,822.85 1,271,103.75 211,496.89 Ontario Libertarian Party 46,208.00 Ontario Provincial Confederation of Regions Party 5,214.00 Paramount Canadians Party 6,448.00 Party for Human Rights in Ontario 4,486.10 Party for People with Special Needs 9,548.50 Pauper Party of Ontario 2,626.50 People First Republic Party of Ontario 5,472.00 Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario 413,107.60 2,039,304.15 1,298,902.71 210,513.34 Reform Party of Ontario 7,936.00 Socialist Party of Ontario 7,688.00 The Only Party 5,208.00 The Peoples Political Party 6,448.00 Vegan Environmental Party 3,842.00 Independents 27,863.35 Total 1,187,728.50 5,851,491.84 3,193,101.70 997,782.73 1. As financial returns are still being processed, these numbers may change after the printing of this report. Please visit the Election Finances section of our website for the most up-to-date figures. 20
OVERVIEW OF COMPLIANCE ISSUES The failure to file financial statements on a timely basis is the most common compliance problem faced by Elections Ontario. This past year, there were over 500 late filers and 41 non-filers. The table below provides more detailed information regarding the late and non-filings. Form Required to be Filed Filing Statistics As of January 11, 2013 Filed by the deadline Late Late Less Than 30 days Late More Than 30 days Not filed as of Jan. 11, 2013 Political Parties CR-4 21 16 5 2 3 0 AR-10 21 19 2 1 1 0 Constituency Associations CR-3 431 217 207 67 140 7 AR-1 431 318 104 77 27 9 Candidates CR-1 654 433 207 76 131 14 Withdrawn Candidates Third Party Advertisers CR-1 11 9 0 0 0 2 TPAR 22 15 7 4 3 0 Delays in filing of financial returns by political entities are problematic because this hinders the compliance review of returns and delays the payment of campaign expense subsidies. It also delays public access to information pertaining to the activities of political entities in a timely fashion which has the potential to negatively affect the integrity and transparency of the political process. Appendices G, I, K, M and O provide a list of the entities who filed late or failed to file their statements. Between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2012, we received 178 complaints under the Election Finances Act. Of the 178 complaints, 146 are closed because there was deemed to be no infringement of the statute and 32 remain open. The most common complaints received were those related to Section 37(2) of the Election Finances Act which is the provision related to political advertising during a blackout period. 21
The table below provides a breakdown on the type of complaints received and the outcome of the complaint. Complaints Received from April 1 2011 to March 31 2012 under the Election Finances Act Number of complaints received 36 Type of Complaints Received (section of the EFA) Section 22(9) Information to be included in political advertisement (authorization) Status Closed Open 26 10 26 Section 37(5) - Registration for third parties 16 10 10 Section 16 - Contributions 5 5 66 Section 37(2) - Political Advertising during blackout period 61 5 40 Non EF related 38 2 Total = 178 In addition to compliance matters under the Election Finances Act, the Chief Electoral Officer may receive complaints regarding the administration of the Election Act. At the time of writing this report, the Chief Electoral Officer was reviewing a complaint with respect to the administration of the election in the electoral district of Scarborough Rouge River. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS UPDATE In June 2009, the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario (PCPO) and its funding arm, the PC Ontario Fund, brought an application for judicial review against the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario in respect of: 1. the advertising activities and registration of an interest group that registered as a third party in the Province of Ontario s 2007 General Election; and, 2. the results of the Chief Electoral Officer s investigation into the third party s activities. The matter was heard on April 27, 2011 by the Divisional Court. The court dismissed the application and released its reason on May 18, 2011. The citation for the case is PC Ontario Fund v. Essensa, 2011 ONSC 2641. The PCPO obtained leave to appeal the decision and the appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal on June 21, 2012. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and released its reasons on June 27, 2012. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Divisional Court; it agreed that the impugned actions of the Chief Electoral Officer relating to the investigation into the PCPO s compliant are not subject to judicial review and that the challenge of the decision to register the interest group as a third party for the 2007 General Election is moot. The citation for the case is PC Ontario Fund v. Essensa, 2012 ONCA 453. 22
PREPARING FOR A CONSTANT STATE OF ELECTION READINESS The outcome of the 2011 General Election was the election of a minority government. In a minority government, no political party holds a majority of seats which means that the government may have to resign on a vote of confidence. Historically, minority governments have tended to have shorter terms than majority governments. The uncertainty of an election date in a minority government situation requires Elections Ontario to be in a constant state of election readiness. Immediately after the election, we consulted with Elections Canada and Elections Quebec to learn best practices in managing event readiness given their extensive and recent experiences managing in a minority government scenario. We determined that we would use the 2011 General Election framework, with limited modifications, to administer the next election. Each division was required to immediately recalibrate their event activities following the 2011 General Election and ensure the organization s ability to be ready to administer an unscheduled general election at any time. We also engaged with returning officers in a number of activities to ensure that they maintained a state of readiness in the field. During the recalibration, we looked for opportunities to seek out cost efficiencies. As a public sector agency, we recognize the need to exercise fiduciary restraint. For example, we adopted strategies that demonstrate cost efficiencies such as the production and use of evergreen materials for event marketing and advertising and enhancements to the special ballot process. The organizational effort required to move our planning and budgeting frameworks to align with the realities of a non-fixed date general election cannot be overstated. The recalibration resulted in a significant workload because we had to be ready to run an election, at any time, with little notice. The choices to electors introduced in the 2011 election further complicated the election readiness planning since we are required to be able to provide electors with a special ballot the day after the writs are issued. Over the course of the next year, we will refine our election readiness program to ensure that it allows us to continue to make improvements to the services we deliver while maintaining cost efficiencies. Future areas of consideration could include efficiencies within our field staffing model and the need to look for additional opportunities to introduce technology in our processes. 23
24
WHERE WE ARE GOING INTRODUCTION Elections Ontario is evolving so that continuous improvement and change become a core part of our culture. The Canadian and global economy have been transformed by rapid changes in technology and the introduction of electronic service channels. There is a growing expectation that electoral agencies will be employing some of these solutions to increase efficiency, reduce costs, and increase the integrity, accessibility and participation in the electoral process. We have embarked on key initiatives that support the modernization of our election management and voting processes including the development of a new strategic plan and undertaking an Alternative Voting Technology research study. The new strategic plan will be released in 2013 and the report on Alternative Voting Technology will be tabled with the Legislative Assembly by the end of June 2013. In all that we do, Elections Ontario needs to put the elector first while maintaining integrity and our fiscal responsibility and accountability. We need to adapt and build for the future a future that includes choice in how our services are accessed. It will take time to implement these changes and will also require legislative amendments. Historically, the rules that govern elections are slow to evolve. Many rules are carried over from one generation to the next. In part, the transfer happens because of the importance of the integrity of the electoral process. Recent events during the 2011 Federal Election illustrate the increased scrutiny and focus on the protection of integrity in the electoral process. The election needs to be administered with proven, well-tested, and secure processes. For this reason, we will be using by-elections as opportunities to pilot new ways of doing business. The pilots will allow us to test, on a small scale, options for improving and modernizing the electoral process. We will report on these pilots to the Legislative Assembly. With the Election Statute Law Amendment Act, 2010, the Legislative Assembly signalled its willingness to create more flexibility for voters. We hope that this willingness will continue when discussing future potential amendments. To that end, we would like to use this annual report to begin to provide a road map for the Legislative Assembly to consider in its deliberations on changes to Ontario s election laws. 25
GUIDELINES FOR LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS We would like to create a modern electoral process for all Ontarians, one that protects integrity and builds choice for electors in how they access our services. To get there, Elections Ontario needs to have the ability and flexibility to prepare, administer and deliver elections in ways that are responsive to the needs of citizens and their local communities As mentioned in his report to the Select Committee on Elections 2, the Chief Electoral Officer recommends legislative amendments that: Use clear language Employ permissive rather than prescriptive legislation Modernize the electoral process Ensure cost effectiveness RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS The following seven legislative amendments are being recommended because they will pave the way for the modernizing the electoral process. For example, amending the Representation Act, and creating a regular, scheduled process for reviewing electoral district boundaries would improve the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring that all votes are weighted as equally as possible. Amending the Representation Act is particularly important to allow a timely response to the redistribution activities underway at the federal level. In a similar manner, combining the Election Act and the Election Finances Act and writing it in clear language would assist in modernizing the legislative framework that underpins Ontario s electoral process. A clear language, unified statute would clarify roles and responsibilities and improve the integrity of the electoral process since all stakeholders would have a common understanding of the rules. A single address authority for the province would also enhance the integrity of the electoral process by improving the accuracy of the Permanent Register of Electors for Ontario from which the voters list is compiled. Changing voting day to a time when schools are not in session and recognizing the need of registered political parties for centralized delivery of election materials would help to simplify the administration of the election. 2. The Chief Electoral Officer submitted the report Modernizing Ontario s Electoral Process: Recommendations for Legislative Change to the Select Committee on Elections on February 4, 2009. The report can be found in the Publications section of our website. 26
With respect to the Election Finances Act, reviewing the rules surrounding third party advertisers and taking measures to improve compliance with the statute would help to improve the integrity of the financing of the electoral process. A list of additional technical legislative amendments that Elections Ontario has previously recommended be made to the Election Finances Act can be found in Appendix P. Electoral District Redistribution The Chief Electoral Officer recommends that the Representation Act, 2005 be amended to provide a regular, scheduled process for reviewing electoral district boundaries. For the democratic process to be truly representative, a system for maintaining the fair and balanced distribution of electoral district boundaries is essential. The Representation Act, 2005 provides that Ontario s electoral map has 107 electoral districts, but it does not explain how the map will be adjusted in the future. The process and timetable for the future redistribution of provincial electoral districts needs to be established. Every other jurisdiction in Canada has a regular schedule and process for future redistribution. At the federal level, an electoral district redistribution began in February 2012. Based on Ontario s population growth since the last decennial census and the formula established in federal legislation, the number of federal electoral districts allocated to the province has increased from 106 to 121. There is no current process, timetable or decision on whether the provincial electoral districts will be altered to reflect the new federal boundaries. Redistribution is a major undertaking that affects not only election planning and staffing, but also requires extensive efforts from the registered political parties that manage their constituency associations and their finances before an election. Combine the Election Act and Election Finances Act into One Statute The Chief Electoral Officer recommends that the Election Act be combined with the Election Finances Act to streamline and clarify the electoral process. A new clear language statute can clarify and correct a number of inconsistencies that have arisen from the incremental legislative changes that have occurred over the years. Some provisions of the Election Act need to be repealed because either the courts have struck them down or they are spent. The Election Act is a patchwork quilt of numbering given that so many provisions have been added and repealed since the last consolidation of the law in 1990. For example, Sections 18, 18.1, 18.2 and 18.3 address enumeration. 27
In addition, there are areas, such as those related to the returning office advance poll, where some housekeeping amendments would assist in simplifying the process. These inconsistencies make the law unnecessarily complex and confusing for the public, parties, and administrators alike. We would be happy to work with the Legislative Assembly to identify these types of improvements in the drafting process for any new legislation. Single Address Authority The Chief Electoral Officer recommends that a single address authority be established for Ontario. In Ontario, municipalities are responsible for creating the addressing conventions for the land parcels in their regions. The result is 444 different naming conventions across the province since each municipality establishes its own practice. The lack of a central address authority in Ontario creates significant challenges for an electoral registration process. Without accurate addressing information, it becomes almost impossible in certain parts of the province to adequately ensure that an elector has been placed at the appropriate location for them to exercise their democratic franchise. Part of the addressing difficulty arises because people provide different versions of their address to different service providers. For example, an elector may use the 9-1-1 version of their address when completing their taxes, but use the rural route version of the address on their driver s licence and use their Canada Post mailing address on their health card. That one elector could appear in the voters list, in any one of three different ways makes it very difficult for Elections Ontario to determine where they actually reside and to assign them to the most convenient voting location for their address. By establishing a single address authority in Ontario, inconsistent naming conventions of land parcels would be reduced and more accurate register information could be maintained. This would reduce voter confusion and frustration as electors could be assigned to the correct polling division. A single address authority would also improve the accuracy of the information provided to parties and candidates. In the 2011 General Election, the post-event survey found that the most common problem cited from candidates and campaign managers related to concerns about the quality of the voters lists they received. The single address authority would not only benefit Elections Ontario, but also other parts of the government that require up-to-date addressing information such as the Ministry of Transportation and the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care. 28
Change Voting Day The Chief Electoral Officer recommends amending Subsection 9.1(5) of the Election Act to change voting day to a time when schools are not in session (e.g. weekend or school holiday). Access to schools for use as locations for voting was again a last minute challenge in one school board during the 2011 General Election. While this particular problem was ultimately resolved at some cost, it could have been eliminated if schools were closed to students, either through the use of Professional Development days, or by moving election day to the weekend. Schools best fit the criteria set out by the Election Act for the establishment of voting locations: they are conveniently located, they usually provide a large space such as a gymnasium, electors are familiar with their location and they usually provide access for persons with disabilities. Many democracies around the world hold their elections on the weekend. As voter turnout declines, it may be worth noting that other democracies hold their elections on the weekend and have a much higher voter turnout rate than Canada. For example, Quebec s municipal elections are held on a Sunday, New Zealand holds its general elections on a Saturday and France holds its general elections on a Sunday. Centralized Campaign Administration The Chief Electoral Officer recommends that the Election Act be amended to allow for registered political parties to have access to all products and services provided to candidates. For many elections, Elections Ontario has provided access to the information given to registered candidates to registered political parties as a customer service. For the parties that field 107 candidates, it appears as though the management of political campaigns has become more centralized and sophisticated. We are having challenges fulfilling information and service requests from political parties because our systems are not designed to support a centralized model. The Election Act is structured for a decentralized model where election products and services are distributed via the 107 returning officers to candidates. We need to work with the registered political parties to clarify the information that they require and determine the most efficient method for them to access the information and services that we recognize are essential to their campaigns. A legislative amendment would assist in this clarification and would also authorize us to invest in updating our technology systems. 29