Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 14th, 2006

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Okay. The second half of my time was going to be about the list, because I can prove who I am, but if the list isn't solid enough, it doesn't matter if I'm not on it, or in some cases if I'm on there three or four times; I could still have the potential to prove that I'm that same person three times and vote.

On the other question, then, I'll go to lists for a little bit. Right now, the list is apparently gathered in a number of ways, but the most prevalent appears to be that checked box on your income tax form. However, there is some misinterpretation by some people who may not be Canadian citizens and yet pay income tax. They've also checked the form, and therefore it clouds the list because they are not citizens. Then of course, there are those who don't check that list, and therefore they may not be on there either.

Within the privacy guidelines as you know them, what other lists are gathered by government that we could use to verify this list?

I don't think we can just go tapping into each of the other lists that may be gathered by government and do this. I know that under the Canada Elections Act, Mr. Kingsley has the authority to do this, to make negotiations and do this.

For example, I guess the cleanest list we might have may be census data. Is there any possibility that we could use census data every 10 years to create a permanent electors list?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

My understanding is that there are fairly broad powers under the Privacy Act to run data lists against each other, as long as they meet the test of consistent use, which the Supreme Court has set out. I don't know the details--and we might have to get back to you on this--as to how the Canada Elections Act would fit under that scheme, because it's not subject to the Privacy Act. I must say, as Privacy Commissioner, I think this is an anomaly. I think this should be corrected. In fact, last week I tabled a report on the reform of the Privacy Act. In a modern country like Canada, minimally, all our legislation has to at least nominally be under the Privacy Act, and then we should have exemptions or modifications as necessary for that particular act.

So the Canada Elections Act is a slightly different piece of legislation, but the director general of elections can come to a written agreement with any one of the government departments that collects information, for that information-sharing for the purposes of his list.

Could I ask the assistant commissioner to respond?

[Raymond D'Aoust, Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada]

Thank you.

In fact, I believe there are some 40 agreements of the nature that Madame Stoddart just described, whereby the director general of elections actually gets information from federal agencies or organizations. Canada Revenue Agency is one of them, but I believe they have an agreement also with Canada Post Corporation to get information about addresses, and also with provincial and territorial motor vehicle registrars, provincial electoral agencies, and so on.

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

We understand that he can make these. The other thing he's asking for is that we assign a permanent identifier to each voter so that when we do get the cross-information, we can start to prove that it's that person.

We talked about date of birth, or whether it's by driver's licence number. When someone moves from one street to another but their driver's licence number doesn't change, when that next list comes and we've assigned a permanent identifier to them, we know that driver's licence still belongs to that person; therefore, we can change the address on the permanent electors list.

Are there any problems that you see with assigning a permanent identifier to an elector?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I think there are potentially very great problems. Again, we have to come back to, what are the real misapplications that you have found with the current wording of the Canada Elections Act? Is electoral fraud such a problem that we have to make drastic changes?

Assigning each elector in Canada--and that's a good part of our population--a single number is one step towards assigning every single citizen a number. This goes to a society in which we are all numbered, in which, then, you can start to cross-tabulate the numbers and create citizen profiles, and thus enhance surveillance of citizens very drastically.

There are ways of doing it, the random use of numbers, keeping it only for that purpose, and so on, as is done in electronic government to some extent. In electronic government, yes, for various reasons--because you don't see the people and it's a distance relationship, and so on--it is done, but again I would say we should think very carefully before we start to assign more identity numbers to Canadian citizens. We already have a social insurance number.

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Can we use it?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Again, do you have another way? What is the problem? How bad is the problem you're trying to fix? Do you need the social insurance number to have a reliable electoral list?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you with respect to that round.

What I'm gathering is that you can use it. It's not a violation of privacy; it's just that we have to be very careful. If we choose to use an elector number, it should be random and have a distant relationship from the government, basically.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Those would be the caveats, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I just want to clarify one other question from Mr. Simard.

If, in fact, there were a box on the income tax forms that asked if you are a Canadian citizen, that would not be a violation of privacy as long as the citizen authorized that information to be transferred to the Chief Electoral Officer?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I would think so, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

Madam Picard, go ahead, please.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Excuse me, Ms. Stoddart. You have perhaps answered the question from my colleague Mr. Simard, but I was looking through my papers and I would like to hear your explanation again.

Would you be in favour of the inscription of the date of birth on the voters' list, the way it is done in Quebec, and of this list being provided to the candidates? That might help eliminate a lot of the mistakes with regard to doubles, in other words people who bear the same name. Would the inscription of the date of birth on the list, as it is done in Quebec, be a problem with regard to the issue of privacy protection?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

My answer, Madam, is always the following: we must strive to use the least amount possible of personal information. I am neither for nor against. I would remind you that the more we use personal information, the more we feed it into large databases, the more we want to share it, the more we increase the Canadian State's ability to monitor its citizens.

Are we managing well enough without resorting to the date of birth? You who make the laws, ask yourselves the question: why should we add the date of birth? If you who are studying the various cases reach the conclusion that the date of birth must be added and that there should really be a requirement, then I would ask you to ensure that the date of birth be communicated the least amount possible. We could study the Quebec example, look at how it is administered in practice, in order that dates of birth not be scattered throughout a riding, given that this is sensitive information.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Would you have a suggestion as to how to avoid that happening? At present, we are having a lot of trouble preventing people from presenting themselves before the tables and voting in the place of others. We do not have the means to effectively prevent identity theft. The person acting as deputy returning officer can only count on the good will of the person who comes forward with a card.

People come with a card. Given that they have a card, they are not asked to provide their identity or an ID card. They are thus allowed to vote. We do not know if it is the right person, because the people at the tables do not know everyone. It is not like in a small village. It is really very different in large cities.

So what should be done? Do you have an idea of what could be done in order to exercise better control over those people who present themselves at a polling station and that would be acceptable?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I am unfortunately unable to answer, because I am not sufficiently knowledgeable about voter identity theft. I cannot tell you where the cause of the problem lies. Is it because the people are not well enough trained or is it because there is no standardized card?

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

People can go to ten different polling stations with cards that do not belong to them. They can vote in the place of 10 other people by going to different polling stations.

Voter cards can be picked up in various buildings. Often, the person who is delivering them is unable to enter a large building, and simply drops them on the floor. There are boxes full of cards that simply sit there.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes, and people pick them up.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

We see this all the time; such cases always occur. Man is not perfect, and there will always be some who do wrong. Unscrupulous people will pick up these cards and go to the polling station to vote in other people's stead.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

If it is a matter of the absence of trustworthy identification, then it would appear to be a problem of ID standardization and staff training.

In this regard, I would encourage you to study the Quebec example. I had the opportunity to observe it in another life, when I worked for the Quebec Commission d'accès à l'information.

I believe that Quebec innovated somewhat, without having to create a new voter card or a new national identity card. In fact, it used the existing cards and allowed those who did not have a card to make a sworn statement.

My impression, Madam, is that the system works rather well. It has been quite well accepted and facilitated the regulation of elections. I would suggest that you consult Élections Québec directly in this regard, since I am unable to speak on behalf of this organization.

The method I have outlined has been in place for nearly 10 years. You could analyze it and see if it might correct the problems you spoke of and that arise in the case of federal elections.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Would you like to offer your time to Monsieur Guimond?

You have two minutes, please.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Stoddart.

For several years now, Mr. Kingsley has been telling us that we should ask the Privacy Commissioner if she is in agreement with the use of people's date of birth.

If my understanding of your response to Ms. Picard is correct, you would prefer to leave this decision up to the legislator. It is up to us, parliamentarians, to decide if that is the way to go. You see no legal problem with regard to the legislation that you are charged with applying. Correct?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Correct.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

You understand why we wish to use the date of birth, do you not? You told Ms. Picard that we should perhaps, as they do in Quebec, ask to see photo ID. We are not talking about what can be found on magazines, such as Chatelaine, where there is a label bearing an address. One can pick that up in virtually any mailbox.

If a person who appears at a polling station and who should be 18 years of age looks like he or she is 78 years old, then we have a problem, and it is a problem that iacn occur with our present system. People can use cards that they pick up in a mall. This is why we thought of using the date of birth.

In your view, are the federal laws that you enforce more restrictive or more liberal than Quebec's laws? Are they truly comparable?