Well, academics tend to comment on both the motivation to vote and the propensity to vote. Some groups are not as likely to turn out. If you arrive at a voting station and someone says to you that you have two forms of identification but that neither of them contains an address and that they need to know that you live within that polling division, your choices are either that you go home and try to find a document that qualifies under the list of 38 or 39, and if you're weakly motivated you may not come back. This may happen with groups that historically have been politically marginal. The other choice for you is to find somebody who knows you and can vouch for you, and that's not always possible in the moment.
I like the Manitoba example, which has not been talked about in this forum. We have used it for two elections. It just means that you sign an oath, and there is a penalty attached if you misrepresent yourself. In another part of the legislation, there is an opportunity, if someone shows up to vote and somebody has already voted under his or her name ahead of him, that the person can still vote, if they have the right ID requirements with address, but would have to sign an oath that they're the real person.
The principle of having voters sign something at the polling booth seems to be part of the thinking behind this bill.