That's correct.
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.
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.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Is it possible that if you were doing the two simultaneously and a candidate was safe and he didn't have to spend much of his maximum for election purposes, he could divert a significant amount of those resources into the referendum question? Would that be a back-door way of getting a tax credit for the referendum question? And therefore is that something we need to adjust if we go that way?
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
If I were a member of Parliament, obviously, that is a question I would ask, but at the same time I would also take into account that your ceiling is $80,000, or whatever--it's in that vicinity. If you're caught advertising outside your riding, if you're meddling into somebody else's, you have to report that expenditure on the other side.
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
If you're doing it within your riding and it's an important topic, well, yes, so be it.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
That was my question. Would that be a significant factor in making our decision as to whether we should actually go with a simultaneous election and referendum? If you don't think it's a significant factor, that's what I wonder.
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
I don't think it would be. I've been around members of Parliament for some time, and there are not that many who are unwilling to spend just because they're sure they're going to win. It's nice to be spending on a certain thing, but not to be saving on a certain thing.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
I have another question. I should know the answer to this, but the question always comes up, at least for those of us who haven't been in the political world forever, of the difference between what we used to refer to as a plebiscite or a referendum. What is the binding or non-binding nature of the referendum that we conduct? Or can we identify that on a case-by-case basis?
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
That can only be done politically. You decide whether a plebiscite is binding or you decide if a referendum is non-binding. You say beforehand and that's what it is.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
That's the way I would view it, because the two terms have become so interchangeable and so confusing that you can no longer say you're holding a referendum and therefore you're bound by the results, or you're holding a plebiscite and therefore you're not bound by the results. That's not what this is all about.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Yes. You tell the people that this is what happens here: 50% plus one carries the day. And that was said before. In some places, they said that 60% plus one vote was required for this. But you make it known beforehand.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
But is it also possible, just to go a step further, and say that this is seeking the opinion of the people, and based on that the legislative body would make the final decision?
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Yes, and a government could easily say, “We're very happy to disregard the advice that we've just been provided by the Canadian people.” They can do that.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Former Chief Electoral Officer, As an Individual
Well, that becomes a reason, and hence the importance of turnout in these things.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
I think that's the importance of keeping that flexible.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Mr. Albrecht has left a minute and a half for one of his colleagues.
Mr. Hoback? Mr. Reid?
Hey, I'm not forcing people.
11:50 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
October 26th, 2010 / 11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Well, actually, it does give me a chance to ask a question.
You mentioned that 50,000 Canadians were disenfranchised back in...?
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Ten thousand: was that the people who had recently moved to Quebec?