Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 31st, 2014

[David Shannon]

You speak to the issue of enforcement. You're a lawyer. I'm also a lawyer, as is my colleague to my left, and I have a particular interest in administrative law. Clearly my recommendations would need some level of enforcement. You heard that my recommendation was for greater funding to the accessibility fund in order to enable an added section, clearly to strengthen it rather than wait for the RCMP to involve themselves in such egregious errors. We're talking about an administrative process, not a criminal process.

To have greater enforcement, one option would be to have greater levers of compellability in the hands of the CEO, but also, and I've seen this in other legislation, to simply link it to another body, such as the Canadian Human Rights Commission or Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Then there is no need for added resources to create an entirely new administrative enforcement mechanism.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I raise this, and all three can provide comment on it. On February 17, 2004, a motion passed in the House of Commons that read in part: That the House direct the Chief Electoral Officer and Elections Canada to expand its initiatives to promote the participation of young Canadians in the electoral process and that these initiatives include making available educational material to schools—

— and so on. This is a resolution that passed.

If we don't amend this legislation, it would prevent Elections Canada from being able to do some of the things that we all agree should be done.

Would Corey, or anyone else who would like to, provide comment on that?

[Corey Willard]

I haven't read the motion, but if it's the consent of the members of Parliament here, I believe that we would have to look at the role Elections Canada would play and the effect it could have on youth, if their mandate is limited via legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Lamoureux.

We'll go to Mr. O'Toole, for a four-minute round, please.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I thank very much all the witnesses.

The first question is for you, Mr. Willard. I'm very glad you mentioned your work with forum and the support of the Churchill Society. I'm happy to say that for about seven or eight years I was a director and fundraiser for the society, and we were very happy to support a great program such as forum.

In your comments you suggested that the changes to vouching might have an impact upon students, a group that is commonly referred to as potentially being impacted. I refer to annex C of the Neufeld report, which is essentially the page at Elections Canada on how to vote. We heard from an earlier witness, who addressed this.

There are three things specifically here that I would say would be tailored for students: student ID, in conjunction with either correspondence issued by a school, such as a letter of admission or any of that stuff; or, in combination with student ID, something related to the student residence, such as admission to, living in the student residence, and that sort of thing. Do you think most students would have two or three of those items?

[Corey Willard]

In my personal experience, yes, they would.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

That's all I need.

You did undergraduate and law school, so whether it's at the University of Ottawa or Osgoode Hall Law School, for instance, it's probably similar across the country.

[Corey Willard]

Yes. Your question is whether or not it's common for students to have student cards.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Yes, I mean ID and a letter of admission. If they want to register on election day with those two things they can vote in that poll. That's provided for now, in fact, and won't change.

Quickly, because I don't have a lot of time, thank you very much, Mr. Shannon and Mr. Brown. I appreciate your time.

Mr. Brown, you responded to a few questions of my colleague Madame Latendresse about the NDP's Freudian slip, whereby they constantly refer to the VIC as the “voter identification card”. That's not what it is. It's actually called the “voter information card”, and it is sent to voters who are on the official list of electors.

You had some concerns that particularly people with some struggles or issues might not have identification that they would have to pay for to use when voting.

Were you aware that the voter information card, which comes from the official list of electors, comes from such things as tax rolls and the aggregated information that government has on someone? If someone is at the margins, would it be fair to say they might not appear on the official list of electors to begin with?

[Bob Brown]

That very well could be. Go down to the mission. If you know Ottawa at all, go down to the mission, to the Salvation Army, to Shepherds of Good Hope, to people living in shelters. Where do they put their physical address? They may not have one. They may not have taxes done. Sometimes they have an address, but a post office box doesn't usually do.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I agree, and I think that all politicians in Ottawa agree that voting is a constitutional, a charter right. That's why, on the existing forms, which I referred Mr. Willard to, the same sort of combination provides for people in that circumstance as well. Specifically, the administrator of a shelter can issue a letter of stay or an attestation with respect to the physical presence of someone who is staying in the shelter.

Would that provision not be better than a VIC that comes from tax rolls? Don't the rules already provide for people who might be living in a shelter?

[Bob Brown]

It's my understanding that many shelters, because of a lack of resources, don't do that. If you have the resources.... There's a lot of people.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

If Elections Canada worked with the shelters in order to inform them of their ability to provide letters of—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. O'Toole, thanks.

Give a quick answer, if you want, but I'm not going to let him talk again.

[Bob Brown]

I can't answer that just offhand. I'd have to look into it and get back to you on it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

Mr. Scott, you have four minutes, or thereabouts, apparently.

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

I just remind everybody that the Chief Electoral Officer spoke to how comparatively accurate the voter information cards are in terms of their being the most accurate piece of federal ID that exists and said that the fact that some people aren't on the register doesn't make them less accurate for those who receive them.

I'd also note that, although I stand to be corrected, I don't believe universities or law schools or whatever can issue attestation letters.

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]

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

No, that has to be with respect to those living in residence, but many students still use their parents' address for correspondence, so it's not as though that mechanism works. It's in residence that it's particularly useful.

For anybody who is living off campus, it's a very different thing. There is a whole bunch of reasons: you may not be on the lease; your driver's ID is from another province. I came up against these in recent elections; people who said that in fact they had been to the polls and couldn't put together the ID. They were university students, in fact, at the University of Toronto.

I was delighted, Mr. Brown, that you brought in an important new angle on the whole question of electronic voting, because the proposed section 18.1 in the bill, concerning alternative voting processes, singles out one form of alternative voting, and that is electronic voting, for a much higher threshold to be passed in order for the Chief Electoral Officer to engage in a test. It requires the prior approval of the Senate and the House of Commons.

The drafters even dared to put the Senate ahead of the House of Commons in this. I'm not sure how that happened.

The point is that the barrier to getting it approved is so much higher than for anything else.

You have brought the perspective of those with disabilities for whom paper ballots are a particular barrier, and I thank you for that, because I've been to this point thinking that it's something that would appeal mostly to youth, as an accessibility issue.

From my perspective, we have to be ready for the time when electronic voting will be secure and people will have the right comfort level. Elections Canada can't be so far behind the trend that it will take another 10 years to engage in electronic voting.

The most important point is that you said, “An inclusive and accessible balloting process would include the option for alternate telephone or electronic voting processes, which would allow for independent verification by people for whom print is a barrier.”

It's really important to note that Elections Canada, when they've been thinking about engaging in e-voting tests, are not saying that it is going to be for the whole system. It can actually be an enhancement to the system, in particular to make it more accessible for certain groups.

I'm wondering whether what I've said rings as correct to you and whether this is indeed something we should emphasize for an amendment.

[Bob Brown]

I'll let you answer the question. A second level of bureaucracy, trying to get agreement, and to get approval in a timely manner, this is just approval on testing: is that a hindrance or has it become a larger barrier than what we already we have?

I would also like to suggest, as I testified in the post office, the digital divide for persons with a disability and seniors...the electronic will go a long way to help with that, but people aren't online as much either. They can get access, and that's why I say.... Plus, with the phone alternatives as well for a lot of people, if you have both those combinations of systems, it will go a long way. It will not get everyone. There are some people who are visually impaired and deaf. To remove that double layer of approval to be able to get something in a timely manner for testing, it's pretty hard right now.

I guess it was in the byelection in Winnipeg North where they had some testing of equipment, which I understand didn't go as well as hoped, but you learn on research and testing. You improve upon that. To go back and get a double layer of approval is difficult.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Scott.

Mr. Reid, for four minutes, please.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Disability is one of those things that is hard to categorize because there are so many different kinds of disabilities, and then within each kind of disability there are so many different ranges of issues. I don't have to elaborate; it's just obvious. I was thinking of one fundamental divide that I think does exist and I wanted to ask about this.

There are people who live in institutional settings and there are people who live independently. It seems to me that the issues they face are distinct. I wanted to start with the institutional settings.

Mr. Brown, in your comments a couple of questioners ago, maybe three questioners ago, you mentioned people who are in the hospital. This made me think. I know mobile polls service some institutional settings. People who are in long-term elder care, residential elder care, would have mobile polls, for example, as would prisons.

I actually don't know what the situation is with hospitals, for people who are in and out. Maybe you can tell me. What is the situation there?

[Bob Brown]

I'm not sure. I'd have to get back to you on that. It just stands to reason that people are.... For a fixed address, again it becomes a problem.

I believe there is a process where somebody can have somebody go to the individual to cast their ballot if they choose, and I may stand corrected on that. I think in some of my past experiences I recall that.

My understanding is it's difficult, so is it worth the bother, that kind of thing? As David was saying, 20% may drop off because of the difficulty.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

It struck me that an obvious potential area to improve accessibility, if it turns out the mobile polls are underservicing, is to expand the use of mobile polls. I actually don't know whether that is the case, so that's why I'm asking the question. I also think of palliative care situations as being another possibility.

I wanted to ask this as well. The VIC, the voter information card, I don't know how often it is actually available to people who are in institutional settings. I got the impression from the Chief Electoral Officer's testimony that there are occasions on which those who administered the institutions are reluctant to provide the information that would provide for accurate accounting of who is there. I don't know what the reasons are, if they have concerns regarding privacy laws or if they just regard it as too much trouble. I genuinely don't know.

I thought perhaps one of you two might know the answer to that question.

[Bob Brown]

Whether it's resources or...I think there are various reasons they provide. It may not be a specific one. It's just that I want to bring the point or identify there is a problem there, and how to work around that becomes an issue. It's at least to identify that this is a problem.