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.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's three minutes this time, is that right?
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Okay.
I wanted to deal with two matters, Mr. Kingsley.
You had mentioned in earlier comments that you had made a recommendation regarding the requirement to have ID at home when enumeration is occurring. We hadn't followed up on that. I think I'm expressing that badly, but I'm referring to a comment you made earlier.
Could you explain—briefly enough so I get a chance to ask the second question on a different subject—what it was you actually proposed?
12:20 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Under the present law, when we do revision, we knock on doors. If the person who answers the door is not already on the list, we offer the option to register. To register, they must provide ID to us, which did not exist before when we did door-to-door enumeration. As well, if they have a spouse and a child or someone else living with them who is a Canadian and is 18 and above, they can register them only if they can provide proof of ID for these people at the door.
What I recommended to you is to do away with that, get the person who is registering these other people to sign the form at the door to say that they are registering these people who are resident at that address, who are Canadians, and provide the dates of birth. Joe Blow signs and has legal responsibility for that, because there is an attestation on the form. That's what I was recommending in order to increase the efficiency of the door-to-door targeted revision.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Do you recall where you made that recommendation, so we can dig it up?
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
It so happens that we brought along the report. It's recommendation 2.4 of “Completing the Cycle of Electoral Reforms”, which is dated September 2005, I think. It was considered here, and you rejected it.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Okay, I'm just marking that down.
In my remaining very brief period of time--because our chair is very precise about these things--you've made a very generous and I think very appropriate promise to come back to the committee regarding the identification documents that you would consider acceptable for us to look at.
The obvious concern I have is just a practical one. It's not inconceivable that the time period necessary for all this to happen after the bill is passed, between then and when an election occurs, could be somewhat tight. I guess I'm expressing a preference, rather than asking a question. But I think you can see that in order to make this happen, to ensure that it does happen, given the fact that it's a minority government and these things can fall apart quickly, it would be awfully nice if we could try to deal with this--assuming the bill goes through--quickly, rather than slowly. I guess that's also a message to the rest of the committee, because I thought we would extend an invitation to you.
I just wanted to express that sentiment.
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, as soon as third reading occurs, I will prepare a document that fits in with the scheme of the bill, and table it with the committee as soon as I can.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
That would be very helpful.
Thank you.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you very much.
Mr. Preston, and a final question from Mr. Dewar. Mr. Preston, please.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Just to move forward, again, thank you. Your presentation was very thorough this morning, so it helped to answer a lot of questions I didn't have to ask.
On the vouching, I was certain that was the case, that we currently have on law that only one person can vouch for one person. So the changes that we're making in this are simply that they must be one person who now resides in the polling division of the person they're vouching for. Is that the change?
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
They must be on the list already, and they must have pieces of ID themselves.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
They must be able to prove the same thing, as if they were voters.
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Those are the two changes from the present system.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
You showed us letters you presented, even, about how to sign people up, whether it's at a shelter, or as you mentioned, a kitchen, or anything to that effect. We had letters where people were signing people up. Would that not be somebody vouching for more than one person?
12:25 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Register and Geography, Elections Canada
The letters we were referring to are, for example, letters we would get from a shelter administrator providing proof of address for homeless people. They are just used as proof of residence if those people need to register on polling day. So they are not vouched for in the sense that they've provided identification--a health card perhaps--saying this is who they are. Those letters serve as proof of residence, and then we register them.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
So on that letter it says that this person showed me identification to prove who he or she is.
12:25 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Register and Geography, Elections Canada
It says, “I”--the person who administers the shelter--“know this person, and I can confirm that he or she resides here.”
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
I'm not questioning, of course, the professionalism of anybody who runs our shelters, but it sure sounds like we're vouching for more than one person.
12:25 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Register and Geography, Elections Canada
It's attesting to residence.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Preston for his question, because that's where I was going in terms of how this would work.
We had Mary-Martha Hale, who is the chair of the Alliance to End Homelessness, and she was concerned about some consequences of this bill. Just to follow up on Mr. Preston's questioning, how would this work for the people she deals with, as you understand the bill?
We have people who are homeless. They can establish that they were indeed at this shelter or at a shelter. They have the bona fide paper that says they were in fact there, signed off by the administrator of the shelter. And then what happens to them, according to what you understand from this bill?
December 7th, 2006 / 12:30 p.m.
Michèle René de Cotret Director, Legislative Policy & Analysis, Elections Canada
At the moment, let's deal with registration, but it's the same for voting. According to my understanding of the bill, at the moment, to register, you first have to have a government-issued document providing your address and identity and photo. They don't have that, so they immediately go to the second tier.