AP Decision Notes: What to expect in Canada's federal elections
WASHINGTON (AP) — Canadians will vote in federal elections that follow a tumultuous several months defined by U.S. President Donald Trump 's often unpredictable global tariff policies and his calls for Canada to become the 51st U.S. state.
Prime Minister Mark Carney called for Monday's elections in March shortly after taking office to replace former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. His Liberal Party appeared headed for electoral defeat under Trudeau, but Trump's economic and rhetorical broadsides seem to have markedly improved the party's standing among voters.
His chief opposition for a full term is Pierre Poilievre, a populist firebrand and head of the Conservative Party that has been out of power for a decade.
Jagmeet Singh heads the progressive New Democratic Party. Yves-François Blanchet leads Bloc Québécois, a Quebec nationalist party. At the time Parliament was dissolved, the Liberal Party held 152 seats, compared to 120 for Conservatives. Bloc Québécois held 33 seats, all in Quebec, and the NDP held 24. The remaining seats were held by unrecognized parties, independents or were vacant.
Canada is a constitutional monarchy, with Britain's King Charles III serving as ceremonial head of state. The country's electoral system is modeled after the U.K.'s.
Here's a look at how federal elections work in Canada:
Election day
Canada's election will be held Monday. Polling hours vary across Canada's six time zones, although most polls are coordinated to close at 9:30 p.m. EDT, which coincides with Eastern Daylight Time in the U.S. Polls in the Newfoundland Time Zone in the east and the Pacific Time Zone in the west close at 10 p.m. EDT. Some electoral districts span more than one time zone.
What's on the ballot
Voters will elect their local representative to the House of Commons. No other contests will appear on the ballot. Voters do not directly cast ballots for Prime Minister.
How are the prime minister and members of Parliament elected?
A member of the House of Commons will be elected in each of the nation's 343 federal electoral districts, also known as a constituency or a riding. The winner in each district is the candidate who receives the most votes. A majority vote is not required to get elected to Parliament. This is sometimes called a 'first-past-the-post' system.
The leader of the party that wins a majority of seats in the House of Commons will form a new government and serve as prime minister. If no party wins a majority, a party — usually the one with the most seats — can form a minority government but must rely on support from some opposition members. In rare cases, two or more parties might reach a formal agreement to form a coalition government together.
Canada's Parliament has an upper chamber called the Senate, but those members are appointed and do not play a role in determining the prime minister.
Who runs the election?
Unlike in the United States, where federal elections are administered by state and local elections officials, the Canadian federal election is administered on a national level by Elections Canada, an independent, nonpartisan government agency.
Who gets to vote?
Any Canadian citizen who will be at least 18 years old on election day may vote in the federal election. This includes Canadians who live outside the country, as well as those who are incarcerated. The chief electoral officer, the government official responsible for running the election, may not vote.
How are ballots cast?
Canadian voters have several options for casting their ballots either in person or by mail. Most are cast in person on election day at a voter's assigned local polling place. Voters also had the option of voting in person at a local polling place by April 21 or at a local Elections Canada office by April 22. Special polling sites were also available for incarcerated voters on the 12th day before election day and for members of the military. Voters who are unable to vote in person on election day or who live abroad may vote by mail.
How are votes counted?
All ballots are counted by hand by federal election officials in the presence of witnesses, usually campaign or party representatives. Additional details of how votes are counted depend on how the ballots were cast.
Ballots cast in person on election day are counted at each local polling place after polls close. Ballots cast in person before election day and mail ballots cast from within the district are tabulated at the district's local Elections Canada office.
Ballots from incarcerated voters, members of the military, Canadians living overseas and voters who live in Canada but outside their home district (such as some college students) are counted at a centralized Elections Canada facility in Ottawa. In some cases, the counting of these ballots may begin up to 14 days before election day, although the results cannot be released until after polls close.
Are there recounts?
An election in an individual district is subject to a recount if the vote margin is less than one one-thousandth of the total votes cast. In other words, in a district where 100,000 votes are cast, a recount would be required if fewer than 100 votes separated the top two vote-getters. A judge would preside over the recount process. Losing candidates or voters may also request a recount.
When and where are results available?
Elections Canada says it expects to count the 'vast majority' of ballots on election night. Each polling place counts its election day vote by hand after polls close and reports the results to the district's local Elections Canada office, which then posts the results on the Elections Canada website. Results are also released directly to Canadian news organizations.
Results from mail voting and ballots cast at special locations such as military bases and correctional institutions are also reported on the Elections Canada website and released to the news media, but they can take longer to tabulate.
Only preliminary results are available on election night. Vote totals are double-checked in the days following the election, but final, official results typically are not available until about six months after election day, according to Elections Canada.
Elections Canada does not declare winners in any district or in the overall contest for prime minister. Canadian media organizations typically announce winners based on their own independent analysis of election results.
What is The Associated Press' role in Canadian election?
Unlike in U.S. elections, the AP will not compile vote results or declare winners in this year's Canadian elections.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GOLDSTEIN: Carney can't fix Canada's underperforming economy on his own
Prime Minister Mark Carney's pledge to make the Canadian economy the strongest in the G7 is the equivalent of attempting to turn around the Titanic before it hits the iceberg. An indication of the enormity of this task is to look at the performance of the G7 countries in real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, which measures economic output per person, adjusted for inflation, and is a widely accepted metric of a nation's prosperity and standard of living. Low economic growth as measured by real GDP per capita has been a longstanding problem in Canada. Under Carney's predecessor, Justin Trudeau (who appointed Carney to chair his economic growth task force in September 2024), Canada recorded the worst record of economic growth since the government of R.B. Bennett in the depths of the Great Depression. According to Jake Fuss, director of fiscal studies for the Fraser Institute writing in The Hub last year, Canada's real GDP per capita grew by 1.9% in the Trudeau years. That was lowest in the G7, which includes the U.K., Germany, France, Italy, Japan and, most alarmingly, the U.S., our largest trading partner, where real GDP per capita grew by 14.7% during the same period. University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe, also writing in The Hub last year, noted real GDP per capita in the U.S. is now almost 50% higher than in Canada – unprecedented in modern history. LILLEY: Mark Carney offers words – Pierre Poilievre's words – but we need action EDITORIAL: Carney defies calls for a spring budget GOLDSTEIN: Carney's hocus-pocus plan to increase debt and balance the budget In the Liberals' 2022 budget, then-finance minister Chrystia Freehand warned that unless this trend is reversed, 'the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development projects that Canada will have the lowest per-capita GDP growth rate among its (38) member countries' from 2020 to 2060. Carney's announcement of proposed legislation on Friday – which he wants passed before Parliament adjourns from the summer – to reduce federal barriers to interprovincial trade, increase labour mobility and streamline government approvals for nation building infrastructure projects, are all aimed at increasing economic growth. But they all depend on co-operation by and among the provinces. And the reality is that decades of inaction on these issues has cost the Canadian economy an estimated $200 billion annually, increased the cost of goods and services to Canadians by up to 14.5% and reduced GDP growth by up to 8% annually. At the meeting between Carney and Canada's premiers and territorial leaders last week in Saskatoon to address these issues in the face of the threat posed to the Canadian economy by U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs, all the participants paid lip service to working together on these issues. But the one premier not present – B.C.'s David Eby, who was on a trade mission to Asia – promptly rejected any new pipeline crossing his province's territory, as did many Quebec politicians when it comes to their province. Any new pipelines will also be opposed by environmental organizations and some (although not all) Indigenous groups who, while they do not have veto power over such projects, must be meaningfully consulted under Canadian law. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has cited the enormous economic damage caused by Canada's failure to build pipelines. Had the Northern Gateway, Energy East and Keystone pipelines been built (Keystone was killed by then-U.S. president Barack Obama), she said, Canada would be producing 2.5 million more barrels of oil per day. 'That's $55 billion a year worth of GDP value, which is worth $17 billion to my government alone and about an equal amount to the federal government.' The Carney government does have more direct control of some issues it can move on to boost Canada's economic growth. For example, it can introduce taxation policies that encourage businesses to invest in new technologies that boost productivity, as well as increase competition. It can lower Canada's immigration levels so that increases in population do not exceed the rate of economic growth, which reduces GDP per capita. It can reduce government spending. On that issue, Carney says he intends to reduce the growth rate in the operational costs of the federal government under Trudeau from 9% annually to less than 2%. But Carney's election campaign platform also outlined $130 billion in new spending over four years with total deficits of $224.8 billion. While Carney says most of that will be spent on infrastructure, it's 71% higher than the $131.4 billion in deficit spending the Trudeau government predicted during the same period in its fall economic statement in December 2024. Finally, of course, Carney needs to negotiate a deal on tariffs with Trump. lgoldstein@
The Verge
an hour ago
- The Verge
A ban on state AI laws could smash Big Tech's legal guardrails
Senate Commerce Republicans have kept a ten year moratorium on state AI laws in their latest version of President Donald Trump's massive budget package. And a growing number of lawmakers and civil society groups warn that its broad language could put consumer protections on the chopping block. Republicans who support the provision, which the House cleared as part of its 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' say it will help ensure AI companies aren't bogged down by a complicated patchwork of regulations. But opponents warn that should it survive a vote and a congressional rule that might prohibit it, Big Tech companies could be exempted from state legal guardrails for years to come, without any promise of federal standards to take their place. 'What this moratorium does is prevent every state in the country from having basic regulations to protect workers and to protect consumers,' Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), whose district includes Silicon Valley, tells The Verge in an interview. He warns that as written, the language included in the House-passed budget reconciliation package could restrict state laws that attempt to regulate social media companies, prevent algorithmic rent discrimination, or limit AI deepfakes that could mislead consumers and voters. 'It would basically give a free rein to corporations to develop AI in any way they wanted, and to develop automatic decision making without protecting consumers, workers, and kids.' 'One thing that is pretty certain … is that it goes further than AI' The bounds of what the moratorium could cover are unclear — and opponents say that's the point. 'The ban's language on automated decision making is so broad that we really can't be 100 percent certain which state laws it could touch,' says Jonathan Walter, senior policy advisor at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. 'But one thing that is pretty certain, and feels like there is at least some consensus on, is that it goes further than AI.' That could include accuracy standards and independent testing required for facial recognition models in states like Colorado and Washington, he says, as well as aspects of broad data privacy bills across several states. An analysis by nonprofit AI advocacy group Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) found that a social media-focused law like New York's ' Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation for Kids Act ' could be unintentionally voided by the provision. Center for Democracy and Technology state engagement director Travis Hall says in a statement that the House text would block 'basic consumer protection laws from applying to AI systems.' Even state governments' restrictions on their own use of AI could be blocked. The new Senate language adds its own set of wrinkles. The provision is no longer a straightforward ban, but it conditions state broadband infrastructure funds on adhering to the familiar 10-year moratorium. Unlike the House version, the Senate version would also cover criminal state laws. Supporters of the AI moratorium argue it wouldn't apply to as many laws as critics claim, but Public Citizen Big Tech accountability advocate J.B. Branch says that 'any Big Tech attorney who's worth their salt is going to make the argument that it does apply, that that's the way that it was intended to be written.' Khanna says that some of his colleagues may not have fully realized the rule's scope. 'I don't think they have thought through how broad the moratorium is and how much it would hamper the ability to protect consumers, kids, against automation,' he says. In the days since it passed through the House, even Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), a staunch Trump ally, said she would have voted against the OBBB had she realized the AI moratorium was included in the massive package of text. California's SB 1047 is the poster child for what industry players dub overzealous state legislation. The bill, which intended to place safety guardrails on large AI models, was vetoed by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom following an intense pressure campaign by OpenAI and others. Companies like OpenAI, whose CEO Sam Altman once advocated for industry regulation, have more recently focused on clearing away rules that they say could stop them from competing with China in the AI race. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West' Khanna concedes that there are 'some poorly-crafted state regulations' and making sure the US stays ahead of China in the AI race should be a priority. 'But the approach to that should be that we craft good federal regulation,' he says. With the pace and unpredictability of AI innovation, Branch says, 'to handcuff the states from trying to protect their citizens' without being able to anticipate future harms, 'it's just reckless.' And if no state legislation is guaranteed for a decade, Khanna says, Congress faces little pressure to pass its own laws. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West,' he says. Before the Senate Commerce text was released, dozens of Khanna's California Democratic colleagues in the House, led by Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA), signed a letter to Senate leaders urging them to remove the AI provision — saying it 'exposes Americans to a growing list of harms as AI technologies are adopted across sectors from healthcare to education, housing, and transportation.' They warn that the sweeping definition of AI 'arguably covers any computer processing.' Over 250 state lawmakers representing every state also urge Congress to drop the provision. 'As AI technology develops at a rapid pace, state and local governments are more nimble in their response than Congress and federal agencies,' they write. 'Legislation that cuts off this democratic dialogue at the state level would freeze policy innovation in developing the best practices for AI governance at a time when experimentation is vital.' Khanna warns that missing the boat on AI regulation could have even higher stakes than other internet policies like net neutrality. 'It's not just going to impact the structure of the internet,' he says. 'It's going to impact people's jobs. It's going to impact the role algorithms can play in social media. It's going to impact every part of our lives, and it's going to allow a few people [who] control AI to profit, without accountability to the public good, to the American public.'
News24
an hour ago
- News24
Elon Musk deletes post claiming Trump 'in the Epstein files'
Elon Musk accused Donald Trump of being linked to Jeffrey Epstein through secret government files, but provided no evidence to back up his claims and later deleted the posts. The ongoing feud between Musk and Trump escalated rapidly after Musk criticised a spending bill. Trump and Epstein were known to have socialised in the past, though Trump has denied involvement in Epstein's alleged crimes, which remain a controversial topic among conspiracy theories. Tech billionaire Elon Musk has deleted an explosive allegation linking Donald Trump with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein that he posted on social media during a vicious public fallout with the US president this week. Musk -- who exited his role as a top White House advisor just last week -- alleged on Thursday that the Republican leader is featured in secret government files on former associates of Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while he faced sex trafficking charges. The Trump administration has acknowledged it is reviewing tens of thousands of documents, videos and investigative material that his "MAGA" movement says will unmask public figures complicit in Epstein's crimes. "Time to drop the really big bomb: (Trump) is in the Epstein files," Musk posted on his social media platform, X as his growing feud with the president boiled over into a spectacularly public row on Thursday. "That is the real reason they have not been made public." Musk did not reveal which files he was talking about and offered no evidence for his claim. He initially doubled down on the claim, writing in a follow-up message: "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out." However, he appeared to have deleted both tweets by Saturday morning. Supporters on the conspiratorial end of Trump's "Make America Great Again" base allege that Epstein's associates had their roles in his crimes covered up by government officials and others. They point the finger at Democrats and Hollywood celebrities, although not at Trump himself. No official source has ever confirmed that the president appears in any of the material. Trump knew and socialised with Epstein but has denied spending time on Little Saint James, the private redoubt in the US Virgin Islands where prosecutors alleged Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex. "Terrific guy," Trump, who was Epstein's neighbour in both Florida and New York, said in an early 2000s profile of the financier. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." Just last week Trump gave Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But their relationship imploded within days as Musk described as an "abomination" a spending bill that, if passed by Congress, could define Trump's second term in office. Trump hit back in an Oval Office diatribe and from there the row detonated, leaving Washington and riveted social media users alike stunned by the blistering break-up between the world's richest person and the world's most powerful. With real political and economic risks to their row, both men appeared to inch back from the brink on Friday, but the White House denied reports they would talk.
