NTI budgets $2M for vouchers to boost voter participation
Controversial plan aims to increase voter turnout for Dec. 9 presidential election
Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., the legal representative for all Inuit in Nunavut, will offer a $100 gift card to all beneficiaries who vote in the upcoming Dec. 9 presidential election. (File photo)
This story was updated on Monday, Nov. 18 at 2 p.m. ET.
Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. hopes that offering $100 vouchers to Inuit beneficiaries who show up at polling stations for the Dec. 9 presidential election will be a “win-win situation.”
“Putting benefits into Inuit households while increasing voter participation at the election,” Ivaluarjuk Merritt, spokesperson for NTI, said in an email to Nunatsiaq News explaining the move.
On Dec. 9, Inuit beneficiaries in Nunavut will elect a new president for NTI, the organization responsible for ensuring obligations made to Nunavut Inuit under the Nunavut Agreement are upheld.
Historically, voter turnout for elections at NTI and regional Inuit organizations has been around 30 per cent. In recent years, that has dropped to under 20 per cent, Merritt said.
In 2021, Aluki Kotierk won her second term as NTI president in an election where only 17.5 per cent of eligible voters cast ballots. Kotierk is not seeking re-election, leaving the field open to four contenders.
For this election, the NTI board voted to allocate $2 million for the vouchers — enough for 20,000 people — as a way to motivate eligible voters to cast their ballots.
All voters who show up at the advance polls on Dec. 2, mobile polls Dec. 3 to Dec. 6 or on election day Dec. 9 will receive a voucher that can be redeemed for a $100 gift card from their Co-op or Northern store by the end of the year.
Those who live outside of Nunavut can vote from polling stations in Yellowknife, Ottawa, Edmonton or Winnipeg and receive a mailed-out $100 Visa prepaid card after the election by filling out a voucher application form.
The organization will also provide each leadership candidate a $5,000 credit for campaign travels and is organizing a televised all-candidates debate to “encourage voter participation,” NTI announced in a news release Thursday.
Merritt said it’s too early to estimate the effectiveness of the program and whether it will used in future elections.
Carleton University professor Gabriel Maracle said that although the use of vouchers is unconventional, “the uniqueness of the landscape [in Nunavut] requires uniqueness in solving the problem.”
“I understand the approach and the thinking behind incentivizing people to show up to vote,” said Maracle, an assistant professor in Carleton’s department of political science specializing in Indigenous politics, governance and institutions.
He said one explanation for the low voter turnout is people’s growing skepticism toward Indigenous organizations like NTI, which is part of the overall rise of skepticism toward institutions generally.
However, others have expressed concerns about the program, calling it undemocratic.
Former MP Peter Ittinuar, the first Inuk elected to the House of Commons, said the initiative is “unethical and immoral” and speaks to the “corporatization” of NTI.
Of the four presidential candidates running, only Cathy Towtongie spoke against the program, saying it might be perceived as “buying votes.”
Nicole Camphaug and Jeremy Tunraluk both spoke in favour, while Andrew Nakashuk declined comment “as the decision was already made.”
“The criticisms need to be taken seriously, because there is a very long and messy history of, you know, politicians trying to buy votes,” Maracle said.
If the voucher incentive is used in future elections, it could benefit the incumbent or the candidates most closely associated with the incumbent, he said, because voters might view those incentives as coming from NTI’s leadership personally.
“But you know, realistically, how many people are we talking about in terms of purchasing votes if only 17 per cent of the total eligible population is turning out,” Maracle said
This is not the first time similar ethical questions were raised in Nunavut politics.
In 2021, the Hamlet of Arviat offered a COVID-19 vaccine lottery. Five residents had their names drawn to win $2,000 in cash to entice people to get inoculated.
At the time, some residents thought the draw was unethical.
Maracle said he’s interested to see if the NTI voucher plan will increase voter turnout. Organizations like that need legitimacy, which comes from the people they represent.
“Seventeen per cent turnout is really bad, and it’s not good for their mandate,” he said, adding at this point, any attempt should be taken to fix the situation.
Correction: This story has been updated to correct advance and mobile polling dates.
I think the main reason is, lot of NTI beneficiaries are befitting anything, some even might just accept the ballot just to get the easy money and not put an X at all.
The incentive structure was conceived in complete blindness to the unintended consequences you’re pointing out: flooding the polls with ignorant voters whose ‘stake’ in the process is nothing more than their voucher.
The spokesperson for NTI on CBC and Igalaaq already said that you don’t need to vote to get the voucher or visa card if you live outside the Territory. I think you will need security at the voting stations down south as there will be thousands of Visa cards with the people who are running the election. Anyone can go in with a gun or weapon to have access to the cards. This should have been the talk of the people 8 months ago. I think with Nicole running from the group in NTI , they got scared of an outsider coming in. It’s a bribe. To get people to go out and vote , Visa cards as door prices would have done the job.
“Seventeen per cent turnout is really bad, and it’s not good for their mandate,” he said, adding at this point, any attempt should be taken to fix the situation.
That is bad, but does it justify “any attempt” at correction? Did anyone consider the consequences of a precedence like this? Or, how it might affect the reputation of the organization? Or, what it tells the electorate about itself?
I can’t believe a professor of political science wrote that cowardly milquetoast drivel.
Money to vote. You have to be insane to start doing this. What other crazy schemes can these people come up with. When does the crazy train stop. People have to learn that. Every think that they do doesn’t include free money. I thought free money for square dance coemptions. Was a little beyond normal. But this is really out there.
Maybe the reason is not voter apathy, but a lack of faith in the efficacy and support to Inuit from the organization
if someone is trying to buy your vote, is that not a red flag?
What else will the Board think next what we don’t know as members of NTI or other boards for Inuit ,
We are not well represented for what our land claims we wanted as 3rd level Government NTI ,
Secondly our BS Nunavut Government can’t even hire Inuit and we know why this is as kept internal reasons total BS,
This elections is called bribery for $100 watch people start selling them on the streets like the gas voucher given in Pond Inlet as low as $40 for the $100 Voucher,
I may go do my vote ?,
Alot of this as a Inuk we don’t know what future plans are as no words from the representative who are in Boards ,
I guess they can run the train without letting the people know anything much of ,
Taking a big guess turn out 86%….
David
When is the advance poll
The pillar of democracy, giving out money to get people to vote. How much will be traded for cash to fuel the drug and alcohol market.
This is not the right way to spend our money. What about our kids who cannot vote. Should just give vouchers to beneficiaries if you want to spend money. Milk and pampers are expensive. To who ever approved of this should be ashamed just for votes.
I have your solution Nunavut! Want to receive you’re child tax? Then come on down to vote!! No vote……No Child Tax. Wow that was easy, problem solved. 100% voter turn out, LOL
This is an absolute mess. Free voters will just pick a name rather than knowing the candidates strengths. Kanngunaq! Mostly likely inuit don’t vote because majority don’t understand what NTI stands for.
Extra money for the stores?
I have to sell my vote now? I have always taken it as my democratic right and privilege to vote, my elected officials are taking us as less mentally capable as themselves if you vote in this organization you will get a candy. I see this as that my money is being used to bribe me.
Can someone please explain to me why Inuit are always complaining about poverty but their land claims organization is so rich it has to bribe its members to do something as simple and essential as vote for its officers.
Maybe we need to start discussing the fact that Inuit are actually very wealthy and use that wealth to mask a lot of dysfunction and incompetence.
As someone who always does their due diligence as a Nunavummiut and votes, I am saddened to know this was approved. Why does NTI always resort to giving away free money for what they want? Why not use that money to do a huge campaign to inform Inuit about NTI, what it does, what it has done, plans to do, and why its important to vote. Bribing Inuit with vouchers is lazy and expensive, not to mention embarrassing.
Paying $100 to beneficiaries who vote has the appearance of conflict and an attempt to manipulate the election process. One candidate for President has not previously held public office and therefore has low name recognition in the race but is the first name which shows up on the alphabetical ballot. So it’s no surprise she spoke out in favour of the scheme, having had the opportunity for inside influence from having worked as the Executive Assistant to the CEO who was in charge of putting this pay for voting scheme in place on the direction of the Board of Directors. Since this scheme is attempting to incentivize over 80% of beneficiaries who didn’t vote in the last presidential election and presumably have little interest in or knowledge of NTI; they are likely to show up at the voting station to collect their $100 and simply mark their ‘X’ beside the first name they see on the ballot. So the least known person gets the vote of uninformed beneficiaries who are at the polling station to collect their $100 and mark the first name they see on the ballot. This smells of the appearance of conflict and attempted manipulation of the voting process to favour a candidate with otherwise low name recognition. This reflects badly on NTI and could tarnish the results, especially if the former insider in the CEO’s office and the first name on the ballot should win.
more money for Northern Store, through tax dollar
I wonder what the GN will do to top this to get a larger voter turnout.