N.L.'s wild, shambolic election will likely be remembered for all the wrong reasons

On Thursday, I was working on something with a colleague in Ontario when news came that Newfoundland and Labrador was down to just one active case of COVID-19 — a status it had not had in just under six months.

This is remarkable, especially considering that the province just six weeks ago was tackling a suspected (and later confirmed) superspreader event involving the B117 virus variant. In short order, N.L. chalked up 60 per cent of its overall cases to date, moved into a regional and then provincewide lockdown, and effectively put a lid on a mess before it could spill widely.

"Ontario could really learn from that," my colleague said. Ontario, which has recorded more than 336,000 cases, is seeing cases tick upward again this week, amid worries of a third wave.

It's not the first time that I've heard or read someone say this or something similar, such as noting that other jurisdictions can learn from N.L.'s public health measures.

On the other hand, I am pretty certain that no one will say that the rest of Canada will follow the model of how to run an election in a pandemic.

Which is not to say that other jurisdictions cannot learn something from us; they can learn plenty. This election campaign has been, unfortunately, riddled with errors and things gone astray.

Let's start with a defining moment.

One issue after another 

On the same evening — indeed, at the same time — that Newfoundland and Labrador was being rushed into lockdown, the man at the helm of the province's election was doing a national television interview, telling a primarily mainland audience that no one would be heading to polling booths as scheduled the very next day.

There Bruce Chaulk was: on the air with CTV News Channel, telling Canadians that N.L. was moving to mail-in voting only. Dr. Janice Fitzgerald was still speaking at an emergency Friday-night briefing.

So very many of Bruce Chaulk's decisions have drawn criticism — and sometimes fire from politicians — over the course of a campaign that dragged on for just over 10 weeks.

There was the disclosure that he hand-delivered ballots to some voters, when many were clamouring to get one. (Elections NL's website, you may remember, has crashed from demand.) Chaulk minimized the issue by saying he had only delivered "a couple," and on his way home. And then it emerged who the couple were: PC Leader Ches Crosbie and Deputy Premier Siobhan Coady both disclosed they received one — while stressing it was a service they never asked for.

N.L. cancels in-person voting in provincial election

4 years ago

Duration 4:33

In-person voting in Newfoundland and Labrador's election has been cancelled as COVID-19 cases surge in the province. All voting will be done by mail.

This week, we learned something more serious, that Chaulk allowed four people to vote by telephone — even though the law does not allow it, something he had acknowledged earlier in the campaign.

In Labrador, many voters were upset that Elections NL did not have a plan to provide promised language supports for Indigenous citizens. That service was a casualty of the switch to mail-in ballots.

When Fitzgerald called a "circuit breaker" in metro St. John's after a weekend that involved a sharp spike in cases, Chaulk chose to split the province in two parts: one that would vote the conventional way, everyone on the Avalon Peninsula going to mail-in voting.

Delay upon delay

It's become clear that Elections NL was not ready for mail-in voting. The proof? Chaulk kept moving the goalposts for the deadline to have a ballot count. On the night of the shutdown, the deadline was March 1. Two days later, it was extended to March 5. After Canada Post chimed in about having to process a deluge of mail, it was extended to a postmark of March 12. Chaulk made a final delay, bumping the deadline of receipt to March 25.

It is important to note that even before the final delay, Chaulk had said that some people would not be able to vote. "There would have been people that weren't successful in making their applications," Chaulk told CBC's Terry Roberts on Feb. 19. He said then only "something drastic" would change the deadline from March 12. Under pressure, he had to change his mind.

There was evidently no contingency plan at Elections NL for whatever a pandemic might throw. Instead, the agency — which must operate at arm's length from politicians and the rest of the government apparatus — seemed to be making its plans on the fly. There were so many weird strands, like the Port au Port woman who received no less than three separate ballots, each sent to a separate address. (This was one of a series of stories broken by Radio-Canada's Patrick Butler.)

It all felt shambolic — that is, chaotic, no sense of what was going to happen next.

That certainly seems to be the impression that the voting public has of what's been happening. CBC's Vote Compass surveyed 841 adults about their impressions of how the election was being managed. (The survey was in the field between Feb. 24 and March 2.) Some 57 per cent said they strongly disapprove of Elections NL's management, while another 18 per cent said they somewhat disapprove. (Tories and New Democrats were most likely to have negative feelings.)

Turnout will be a historic low

We will be setting a dubious record for low voter turnout. In 2015, about 55 per cent of eligible voters took part.

Even if all of the 150,000 requested ballots come back, that will fall just short of 50 per cent turnout. (Advance polls, you'll remember, did happen, with 33,523 taking part.) Newfoundland and Labrador. has 372,037 eligible voters.

There are considerable fears that this will be an "asterisk" election. That is, it will have a shadow over its head, even if there are no court challenges over its legitimacy. It will likely be remembered, for all the wrong reasons.

• Weekend Briefing: Read earlier editions of this column

NDP president Kyle Rees, a lawyer, has pointed out important problems, such as the limits on scrutineers.

"The public must have a perception after this election is done that the election was carried out in a fair and transparent way and they therefore can have faith in their elections officials," Rees told my colleague Mark Quinn.

"I feel like we are going to be in a position where the outcome of this election is called into question."

Back to politics

PC Leader Ches Crosbie has been furious with the management of the campaign — as well as Andrew Furey, who set the balls in motion for this election in January.

"I'm really upset that this spectacle has unfolded before the eyes of the rest of Canada and we have effectively become a laughing stock all because Andrew Furey, on the basis of modelling that doesn't exist, pulled the trigger on an election in very unfavourable conditions instead of waiting until it could be done safely," Crosbie said this week.

Furey tersely brushed aside the criticism Wednesday, when asked about it during the latest COVID-19 briefing. "Newfoundland and Labrador is not a laughing stock and anyone who says otherwise is wrong," he said.

But it seems likely that there is a bad taste in the public about the whole matter. The CBC Vote Compass survey found that 68 per cent of respondents said the election call should have waited until vaccination had been completed.

So, here we are, 10 weeks and a day later. The campaign for the last six weeks has largely been one in name only; there wasn't much activity anyway, because of pandemic conditions, but the lockdown really put a hush on political activity. I noticed on my walks a variety of neglected signs, many of which had been planted in snowbanks that had enough time to melt away. It seemed like a fitting visual image to an election that was unusual in every conceivable way.

Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador