Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 25th, 2014

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Archer, if you could briefly make a comment, I want to now go to the where to vote cards issue.

[Keith Archer]

Sure. Let me give you a couple of examples of recent spending that our office was involved in to illustrate how I understand the relationship between the office and the legislative assembly and/or government with respect to spending initiatives.

I mentioned in my comments that we sponsored a conference on a 2013 provincial election, and we did it with the University of British Columbia. For us, that was part of our event funding because understanding the determinants of people's civic engagement, for example, was an important element in the event, and so when the funding is allocated for a project like that, it is part of the statutory spending that the office has that I report on to the legislative assembly as event funding in advance of the event, and then report on subsequently after the event.

When I was involved in a recent panel on Internet voting, it was an interesting evolution of that project, because I was requested to do that by the Minister of Justice, and it was important for me to ensure that I wasn't reporting to, and this panel wasn't reporting to, a government ministry, but rather to the legislative assembly. I agreed to head up the panel but under the condition that I would select the panellists, that I would approach the legislative committee for funding for the work of the panel, and that ultimately, the report of the panel went to the legislative assembly as a whole and not to a government ministry. The independence of the office is reflected in a number of our activities, whether they're event activities or special projects.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

With my last 30 seconds, Professor Archer, if somebody were to receive a where to vote card that says “John Smith”, but John Smith lived there before and the current individual's name is John Brown, and then he waltzed off to vote, how would he have to commit fraud with that card? Would he be able to vote that way?

[Keith Archer]

If I have time to expand on this answer a little, the broader question is—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You surely don't, but that's—

[Keith Archer]

Given that a large number of items are type two identity documents, if you have somebody else's type two identity document, are you able to use that and vote fraudulently? The answer is you do so at great risk to yourself, and there is a very good likelihood that you're not going to be successful, whether it's with your voter information card or whether it's with the library card that you happen to find in the lobby of your condo building as well.

Impersonating someone else with their type two identity document is a serious offence in British Columbia, subject to a fine of $20,000 and two years in jail.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Archer. I've given some extra time for that, so remember we did that.

Mr. Simms, you have a seven-minute round, please.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

I thank you for coming in. I'll get right to my question, because we don't have a lot of time.

I have a couple of things to add on that. First of all, Mr. Brock, I'm reading your report. I'm from a rural area, very rural. I have 193 towns in my riding. When I first heard about the vouching system being eliminated, it caused great alarm where I live because a lot of people do not have this necessary ID. Most of the major ID, such as the example of health cards yesterday, don't have an address in my province, so that becomes very problematic.

The voter identification card, however, provided that, as well as utility bills, especially for people in a seniors home.

Can you illustrate how difficult this will be? You do make that recommendation, to not throw out vouching, and I agree. I think it should be fixed and not thrown out, if indeed it is the major problem that the minister professes. Could you elaborate on some of the essential difficulties being as large an area that you have to cover as Elections NWT? Mr. Archer, feel free to comment on that as well.

[David Brock]

Thank you for the question.

I have just two notions in response to that. One is that I provided an appendix to the brief with detailed percentages for every community in the Northwest Territories on the frequency of identification held by residents.

I mentioned that in 27 of 33 of them, it's fewer than 50%. In some of those communities, admittedly quite small communities but their right to vote is no less than anyone else's, we're seeing percentages such as 2% or 4% as opposed to 80% in the city of Yellowknife. In some communities in the Northwest Territories, the frequency with which we find active photo identification held by residents is very low.

Add to that, my understanding is that in some communities in the Northwest Territories, and I'm sure it's true in other northern ridings with a lot of rural communities, it is also difficult to obtain photo identification. If you live in Colville Lake, or Ulukhaktok, or Trout Lake, you don't just walk down to the local DMV office and get a driver's licence. Access just to obtain the card is difficult.

In addition to that, there may be very few incentives to do so if you live in a town where you don't own a car and there's really not much purpose in driving because you can walk to the other end of town and you never fly anywhere. By the way, you don't you need to show identification to fly in the Canadian north anyway. There's very little incentive and very little access to obtaining government-issued photo identification.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

The address is what's key here, and you'll find that it's problematic as well. I know in my area, with certain ID.... For instance, the minister mentioned bracelets and this type of ID. It's supplementary because it's the address that made sense here and the voter identification card was used quite extensively and I'm assuming it was in NWT as well.

Following Mr. Archer's story, I didn't give you a chance to weigh in on that.

[David Brock]

Quickly, Mr. Chair, yes. It's primarily that people don't necessarily have difficulty proving their identity with the other 39 documents available. It is the difficulty of proving one's address, which in smaller communities in the Northwest Territories is primarily a post office box anyway. It's not a residential address, so I'm not sure how that goes any great distance to improving the integrity of the system.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Archer.

[Keith Archer]

In British Columbia, the vouching provision was used more in our most northern electoral district, the district of Stikine, than in any other electoral district. We certainly don't have the numbers that David is talking about, but about 3.5% of all voters in Stikine were vouched for, and in some of the urban districts, it would be less than one-half of 1%. There are certainly differences across the province, and as you're suggesting, it's not randomly distributed. People in the more remote areas are evidently more challenged to provide their proof of identity with a single document.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Switching gears for a moment, you said earlier, Mr. Brock, that being an agent of Parliament, you report to the legislature, which to you is the most important piece of what you call your independence in doing what it is you do and being separate from the executive.

Do you feel that Bill C-23 is a step in the wrong direction in doing what it does? It's not so much about independence, but without the right tools, it's more like isolation. Would I be correct in saying that?

[David Brock]

Mr. Chair, I should clarify that the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada is an agent of Parliament. I as Chief Electoral Officer in the Northwest Territories am an officer of the legislative assembly. I think there's an important variance between the system here and the system in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. That is that we have no registered political parties and no mechanism to register political parties; nor are they represented in our assembly.

Nonetheless, the fundamental relationship is the same, and that is that I, like other chief electoral officers in Canada, including the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario, report through the Speaker and primarily the board of management, or board of internal economy, to the legislative assembly as a whole. That speaks to an important principle underlying why the office was set up the way it was nearly 100 years ago, to remove the administration of elections from the power of the government.

To turn to the bill before us, I don't see many provisions in the bill that change that relationship, but two in particular concern me. One is Treasury Board approval and the other one is the role of the Governor in Council in requesting the CEO to undertake international cooperation or assistance.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Of course, you obviously take advantage, as you mentioned earlier, of much of the research being done by Elections Canada. I know that 19 scholars internationally also regard Elections Canada as doing fantastic work in respect to research and publicizing. Their not being able to do that is really going to hurt you, isn't it? You talk as well about seeking Treasury Board approval. You rely quite heavily on them, and this is going to be a problem.

[David Brock]

Mr. Chair, to go back to my response to Mr. Scott when he spoke similarly, I think it depends on the implementation of that specific provision. My concern is that creating a mechanism for Treasury Board approval by logic also sets up a mechanism for Treasury Board disapproval. I don't want to get to the point of saying that Treasury Board would be disapproving. It's just that it sets up a mechanism under which Treasury Board could be disapproving.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you. You're over seven minutes.

We'll go to Mr. Lukiwski, on a four-minute round. We'll start it with him.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Gentlemen, thank you both for being here.

I want to pick up on what my colleague Mr. Reid had been talking about vis-à-vis advertising.

Like Mr. Reid, I totally agree that the advertising dollars being spent by Elections Canada should solely be concentrating on where to vote, how to vote, and what ID you need, and for a couple of reasons. I strongly believe that the current advertising campaign on why one should vote hasn't been effective. Statistics prove that. I also think that if you just give the basic information of where and how to vote and with what ID, that in itself is promoting voter turnout.

Last, I would point out that I think with all of the other tools we have at our fingertips through schools, through parental guidance, through political parties trying to educate people and get them out to vote, if a person doesn't vote because they don't feel the need to vote, all the advertising in the world from Elections Canada is not going to convince them to vote. But most of the people don't vote because they don't know where or know what they should bring by way of ID.

I also would suggest to you, and this is on which I'd like your comments, that if Elections Canada concentrated their advertising dollars on a yearly basis on what documentation one needs to provide to be able to vote.... Now we have not quite 18 months before the next election. If an advertising campaign were started vigorously today, do you think that those people who might want to vote but don't have the proper ID might have enough time to get the proper ID?

[David Brock]

Mr. Chair, if I understand the question correctly.... Maybe I'll just address the last point, if that's okay, although I'd be happy to elaborate on the previous comments.

As I indicated, at least with respect to the Northwest Territories, and I'm reasonably certain from my experience across the Canadian north that it's true in other communities, although a vigorous advertising campaign to encourage and illustrate why it's important to have identification documents is a valuable thing, it won't necessarily motivate individuals to get sufficient identification in advance of polling day.

I know this because we undertook a massive advertising campaign solely focused on the new voter identification provisions that came into force in 2010. A year in advance of the general election, we had posters and guidebooks available in every community, had radio advertisements in 11 official languages—and radio is still largely listened to in all communities in the Northwest Territories—and nonetheless legislators, as they've made clear, still received complaints and concerns addressed to them as representatives that the voter identification requirements were too strict for people to satisfy and be able to exercise their right to vote.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Let me ask, before we go to Professor Archer, are you saying, of the 39 other eligible pieces of identification, that this provision was too strict, or that voters were saying it's too strict, that they can't comply, can't come up with two pieces of identification out of the 39?

[David Brock]

I wouldn't say that those are as strict as the active photo identification. What I would say is it's clear that some individuals had a difficulty pulling together sufficient identification required at the polls to prove not just their identity but their residency. That point has been put to me by legislators in the Northwest Territories, and I've taken their concerns seriously.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Professor Archer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I'm sorry, Mr. Archer. You always get the end of this.

[Keith Archer]

On the question of whether election agencies currently provide that information, my sense is it was a key feature of virtually all the advertising we did in British Columbia, the where and the how and the when of voting.

Adding to that basic information, we also were a bit more active in this last election campaign in focusing the message on parts of the electorate that historically are less likely to vote. I'm happy to say that in the 2013 general election, we saw voting increase by 165,000 votes in British Columbia and turnout increase by four percentage points, the first time it has increased in more than a generation and a half.