Correct.
Evidence of meeting #34 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was person.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #34 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was person.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
At that point, you would have to produce two documents, each of which proves your identity and residence. The letter from the shelter is one of these documents. You'd need another one.
12:30 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
At the moment, the way the statute is written, no.
12:30 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
That letter from the shelter, at the moment, proves residence. They also need a piece to prove identity.
12:30 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
They need their health card or something.
Assuming that they only have one piece, this is when we get to the third mechanism, which is swearing an oath, then having a person who is on the list of electors for this riding and has himself or herself proof of identity and residence vouch for this person.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you.
I think we all understand what that means, then. The present practice, and what we're talking about, will be a fairly arduous process. As we heard testimony about the other day, which was explained further today, we now are talking about having someone who would have to sign off on the fact that a person has residency in a shelter, and then a person who is on the voters list with ID would accompany that person to vouch for him if he didn't have the second piece of ID, as he has now gotten to that third tier.
12:30 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
Actually, if they don't have two pieces of ID, they don't need any. They go immediately to the third level.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you very much, colleagues.
I hope everybody will indulge me, if I could have three minutes.
I want to ask the witnesses a question. A number of witnesses have been very cooperative with an incredible amount of useful information.
An observation was made by one of our witnesses in an attempt to help folks deemed to be homeless to obtain sufficient identification to allow them to vote in elections. This individual had assisted approximately 350 to 400 statutory declarations. Some of the examples of what they deemed to be sufficient to identify the person were things such as a rent receipt--which would probably make them not homeless, but that was something they did say--as well as anything in their pockets, such as a prescription.
My concern was that another witness had offered that these folks sometimes were subject to theft. Even if they did have identification, often it was stolen, or they suggested it was stolen. I suspected and asked the witnesses that it would make sense that the prescriptions would probably be stolen too.
Given the testimony that some statutory declarations are being signed using such things as a prescription bottle in somebody's pocket, does that create any concerns that this is a legitimate identifier?
12:35 p.m.
Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
I think it was Ms. Bradford who told you they are accepting statutory declarations on the streets in Vancouver. The lawyer who accepts the oath still has to have some degree of comfort that what the person is swearing to is true, that when they are saying this is my piece of identification, they have a certain responsibility as lawyers to be comfortable that what is being said to them is true.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I am not a lawyer and I don't know what is sworn to by the lawyers.
Another statement or testimony was that some of our homeless folks can spend 15 to 45 days at a centre. Are you comfortable that in a 15- to 45-day period somebody could have comfort in knowing that person not only to be that person with a prescription bottle, but to be a Canadian citizen?
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
What is at stake here is the lawyer's professional reputation, because if it can be demonstrated this is not the case, that lawyer is going to be in trouble.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I wasn't trying to get to that answer. I don't want to get anybody in trouble or lead to anything. I just wanted to make sure you're comfortable. That is what I'm saying. You're comfortable for those reasons.
Thank you very much. It is unusual for the chair to ask questions like that, but I hope people will indulge me that privilege.
On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank the witnesses for coming today. Mr. Kingsley, today was a great day for all of us. It is a pleasure to have you here. We seem to pull you from your duties quite often, and I appreciate your indulgence. Mr. Molnar, thank you for your information. Michèle, we certainly appreciate your coming out, and on behalf of the committee we thank you very much.
Colleagues, we have a little business to attend to. If I can take a 30-second break in the meeting, we can go in camera to discuss future business.
The witnesses are dismissed with our gratitude.
The meeting is suspended for 30 seconds.
[Proceedings continue in camera]