Evidence of meeting #27 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was quebec.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Yes. They had not stayed there for six months, and therefore they did not meet the residency test under the statute about who's entitled to vote.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
In your mind, just the nature of the way that played out, that's never actually been constitutionally tested as to whether that was unconstitutional, withholding their...? Or am I wrong?
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
It was constitutionally tested that my office could not make them vote. That judgment was upheld by the Supreme Court. It was not constitutionally tested if Quebec had the right to deprive them of the right to vote in a referendum held under the special guise of a federal referendum at the same time. That was not constitutionally tested.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Right. And if one wanted to test that now, one would have to do so by means of a reference case or something of that nature.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Yes. Mr. Haig took my office to court--hence the “Haig” judgment--and he did not take the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec to court. He had to decide between the two, I guess, or these things are expensive. I don't know what happened; I'm not aware.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Okay. That answers that question.
Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
October 26th, 2010 / 11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
I'd like to get back to this question. Mr. Kingsley, things have changed since 1992. First of all, Quebec is recognized as a nation by the Parliament of Canada. It is understandable to some degree that in 1992, Quebec wanted to hold its own referendum. When you survey Quebeckers, you see that 67% of them say they are Quebeckers first and Canadians second. So that was inevitable. Moreover, we're used to referenda in Quebec, as you know.
I want to understand this correctly. Your position is that the law should apply everywhere without Quebec having the right to hold its own referendum as it did in 1992 for example, or all provinces should have this right. It's one or the other: either it's applied across Canada or each of the provinces would have the right to hold one. Is that what you're proposing?
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
The second option is already provided for in the current legislation.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Yes, that's what allows a province to hold one.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Any province can hold its own referendum.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
What I'm saying is that if there's an intention to work this way with a province and reimburse it, all provinces should be aware of that and each one should be able to make its own decision. Quite frankly, I consider that a second alternative that is less desirable than the idea of holding a federal referendum under a single act, throughout the country. The reason for this is simple. We have federal elections where a single federal law applies; we don't have a provincial law that applies to federal elections.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Yes, but Mr. Kingsley, if Quebec has its own way of holding referenda, you can understand that for example if there is a voter's card in Quebec and there is none in Canada and a referendum was held, Quebeckers would take out their voter's card. However, when there is a federal election, the voter's card is not valid because many people who do not have a voter's card would have the right to vote. I think that that would be a very significant difference in the minds of Quebeckers.
The current legislation allows Quebec to hold its own referenda. What you're suggesting is that next time it not have the right to do so. In your opinion, that would be a simple way to do things. For my part, I can say that since that time, the Quebec nation has been recognized and each province should have the opportunity to hold its own referendum especially on a constitutional issue.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I fully concur that this will be a decision of the committee. I simply expressed a point of view about the management of all this. A way also has to be found to solve the problem of the 10,000 or 40,000 Canadians who would lose their right to vote. That does have to be settled too.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
If, for instance, there is an elector's card in a province and Canada finds it does not want that, obviously it makes a difference as to the number of people able to vote. But it is legislation! If Quebec legislation is valid, passed by the National Assembly in Quebec, I do not see how citizens could circumvent legislation from the National Assembly in Quebec.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Your argument is valid, as is the argument according to which federal elections should be held according to Quebec rules, as there is an elector's card there whereas there is none within the federal elections regime.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
No, because under the federal act, you can hold your own referendum. That is the reason why I would not want to see an amendment to the act regarding the provinces and their ability to take a position on referenda. Federal elections are federal elections. We understand full well that the federal government has the right to dictate standards on federal elections. Inevitably, there will always be problems on ballot day when you have to determine who has the right to vote and who does not. However, we are conscious of the fact that there is federal legislation governing elections.
What you want is to have federal referendum legislation on constitutional matters, preventing the province of Quebec from having the right to hold its own referendum. It needs to be said. You do not want provinces to have the right to hold their own referenda on this matter.
11:55 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I said that it was preferable to do what you've just described, have federal legislation which would apply. If the committee takes another decision and grants this right to the provinces, all the provinces should have the same right, including the right to be reimbursed.
Noon
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
That would be my second alternative. I am very direct, very honest in this respect.
Noon
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Despite the fact that Quebec is recognized as a nation, here, within the federal system.
Noon
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Your argument is just as valid for elections as for referenda. That is where, once again, you see a difference, whereas—
