Australia is fortunate to have avoided a major election controversy in a pandemic-stricken jurisdiction. What would we do, for instance, if it was the state elections rather than the AFL grand final scheduled for October in Victoria? You can't just move the elections interstate, as the authorities may do with the grand final.

There are two quite different international examples which demonstrate the way that elections can become embroiled with the pandemic.

New Zealand's Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has just delayed that country's election day by a month from September to October because of the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown in Auckland, New Zealand's biggest city. She was free to do so, because New Zealand has a Westminster system in which, within limits, the choice lies with the prime minister.

Ardern explained that she did so because of safety and fairness considerations, but she was put under pressure by the opposition National Party and belatedly by her coalition colleague, Winston Peters, leader of the New Zealand First Party. Ardern's dilemma is that she is well ahead in the polls and she could be giving away an electoral advantage. The Nationals and New Zealand First have nothing to lose, because they are both trailing badly. These political considerations on both sides are as important as the safety and fairness considerations.

Undoubtedly campaigning in Auckland during lockdown would be restricted, probably to the disadvantage of the opposition parties, which are trying to catch up. But that judgment is unproven. Who is to say the government itself would not suffer?

The second example comes from the USA, still COVID-19-ravaged, where the presidential election is due in November. The date is fixed. The campaigns are already being seriously affected by the cancellation of rallies, including the usual Republican and Democratic conventions. Voting will also be affected, as an increased number of voters stay away from the polling booths for health reasons and vote by mail instead.

President Donald Trump, who unlike Ardern is lagging in the polls, is more clearly playing politics by suggesting that the result of a poll which relies on mailed-in votes to a greater extent will be fraudulent. That is self-serving. He is also refusing to address the issue by strengthening the resources of the postal service to deal with the increased volume of votes.

These two international examples show how the holding of elections during a pandemic can become controversial, how campaigning can be affected and how politics can infect sensible handling of the real issues involved.

Australian examples are so far extremely limited. During March, early in the pandemic, several Queensland state byelections and local government elections went ahead with just a hint of controversy. The federal byelection for Eden-Monaro also went ahead in early July. Campaigning was affected by the restrictions, but despite the extremely close result no one cried foul.

The Northern Territory election this Saturday is being held in a very safe environment. Both personal safety and economic recovery post-pandemic are election issues; but persisting with the election itself is uncontroversial. Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory go to the polls in October. The performance of the respective governments during the pandemic will become campaign issues, but so will many other non-pandemic issues of the usual sort.

Pandemic restrictions will influence the style of election campaigning in both Queensland and the ACT through greater emphasis on electronic campaigning and less on large gatherings. But that is the direction of modern campaigning anyway.

READ MORE:

There were calls to postpone the ACT elections, but they will go ahead barring a catastrophic re-emergence of health concerns. Let us all hope there is no outbreak in the ACT in the last few weeks of the campaign.

Many general questions about elections arise during a pandemic.

Can they be held on the expected day, or should they be postponed? Either way one side of politics or the other may be advantaged.

What is the impact on campaigning style? Clearly restrictions limit large gatherings, but it is not clear anymore how important large gatherings are in modern campaigns. Restrictions may also affect traditional doorknocking, which makes it harder for new candidates to raise their profile with the electorate. The absence of doorknocking and related canvassing activities concerns me more than the absence of large gatherings.

What is the likely impact on campaign messaging? The pandemic certainly elevates heath concerns and aspirations for economic recovery. This will advantage some candidates and parties compared to others who are concerned with broader issues like corruption, climate change and/or Indigenous aspirations.

What may be the impact on the election result? Elections conducted in the middle of a crisis, such as a war or other security concerns, often favour the incumbent government. Whether this holds true during the pandemic remains to be seen. By the end of the year there will be more evidence, as not only will the three state and territory elections have been held but so will the New Zealand and US elections.

Matters of election timing, campaign style and campaign messaging remain important. There may still be a major pandemic-related election controversy in Australia. Daniel Andrews' Victorian government is not due to go to the polls until November 2022. Scott Morrison is not due until May 2022, but if he is thinking of going early it is still possible that a second wave of the pandemic might restrict his options.