Evidence of meeting #27 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was nations.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Thorsteinson, I really appreciated the statement you made to the effect that our men and women who went to war fought, in good part, for freedom and democracy. You represent an organization of seniors from all areas of Canada. It seems to me that this was a personal statement that you were giving, because obviously you feel very passionate about it, just as members of the opposition, myself included, feel very passionate about the issue.
You underlined that you felt the democracy is actually being diminished by the passage of this legislation. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but in your opinion, is there enough time to even salvage this bill, or should we be starting over?
11:35 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
It's tempting to say we should be starting over, Mr. Chairman, but realistically, a significant list of amendments, I think, would probably find some degree of consent. I can't speak for the opposition parties in Parliament. They will decide on the quality of the amendments, if any, that are forthcoming. But a sweeping list of amendments that restore Canada's reputation in the international community with respect to electoral leadership, quality, and know-how would go a long way.
I would use the example of the New Zealand equivalent of the House of Commons, where it requires 75% approval for anything touching the elections act. That is the standard that Canadians should expect. I'm not sure I answered your question, but I think it was on the overhaul of the legislation, or completely starting over. I'll leave that in the parliamentarians' hands. I hope they're listening to Canadians.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
It's a valid point. Whether it's Sheila Fraser, past chief electoral officers, our current Chief Electoral Officer, or well over 120—or it might even be 160—political academics from all across Canada, there's this mounting opposition to this bill.
Sadly, I think it is going to have to be members of the Conservative Party appealing to this Prime Minister to do the right thing and allow for changes to occur. If that doesn't happen, it's going to be difficult for us to see...because the Prime Minister's Office just doesn't want to have change.
You made reference to something that we have recognized is a fundamental flaw in the legislation. There are a number of them, but the one that we're really interested in is the inability of Elections Canada to compel a witness. We believe, ultimately, that's going to weaken our laws. As more and more people are aware, all we have to do is just say no, and at the end of the day there are going to be fewer prosecutions.
You made reference to the compelling of the witnesses. Do you believe that it's an absolute must in terms of an amendment for this legislation?
11:35 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
Yes. On behalf of our federation, Mr. Chair, I would say that it is a must. We either believe in getting to the bottom of a wrongdoing or we don't.
I would appreciate that those are fair questions for me as a witness here today, but I would love to hear the government members explain what the motive is for providing cover for those who would violate election laws. What is the motive?
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Yes, and I appreciate that it was the question you actually presented. What is the motive? We don't know and we're not hearing it. I suspect it's because the Prime Minister's Office has silenced them on providing the motivation.
To keep the commissioner under Elections Canada is something else that you have argued for. Again, this is absolutely critical. The commissioner's office was originally set up back in 1974, I believe, and it was put into Elections Canada because it was perceived that it would be better administered through Elections Canada as opposed to an outside office.
Do you want to pick up on that political point in terms of the perception of it being under Elections Canada?
11:40 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
It's the independence of the institution of Elections Canada that's paramount here. The commissioner investigating irregularities or more serious alleged violations should indeed be as independent as possible from ministerial control. I think I made that point, but I think independent officers serving Parliament serve Canadians well, and I think most Canadians see it that way.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Finally, Mr. Dinsdale, first nations' involvement in the electoral process is of critical importance. You make reference to section 18, everything that the government had said the current Chief Electoral Officer can, in fact, do. The concern that we have is that there are limits that are being put on the Chief Electoral Officer in terms of the ability to even be able to communicate with your organization to conduct studies or anything of this nature.
Again, I would ask, in your opinion, can this legislation pass without amending that proposed section 18 that would allow Elections Canada to be able to do studies such as how it is we could get more first nations involvement in elections? Could you provide comment?
11:40 a.m.
Acting Chief Executive Officer, Assembly of First Nations
Obviously, thank you for the question.
I think proposed section 18 should be, in our view, amended, or frankly, removed. As we know, as the Chief Electoral Officer said in his testimony and as he has provided information around, it imposes severe limits on the ability to communicate with the public, including civic engagement programs, which obviously would be seen as.... That's the issue that we really see being forefront in that particular clause. It needs to be changed to allow for civic engagement like we've been doing to continue.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
I notice that all three presenters here this morning....
I will give the last question to you, Mr. Howe, in regard to proposed section 18. It doesn't matter, it seems, that whoever comes before this committee is acknowledging that we need to allow Elections Canada to do its job. This particular bill is going to prevent Elections Canada from being able to do the job that it needs to be able to do.
Mr. Howe, in your opinion, is proposed section 18 an absolute must in terms of our making amendments to this legislation?
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
11:40 a.m.
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of New Brunswick, As an Individual
Yes, I think it's essential. This is really a key issue from my perspective, although I do concur with a lot of the other concerns and criticisms that have been voiced about the bill, but this particular one is of great concern.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Thank you very much.
We'll go to Mr. Reid, please, for four minutes.
April 3rd, 2014 / 11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to Professor Scott, as well, for the gentlemanly way in which he withdrew his earlier language.
I wanted to spend a moment, if I could, dealing with the specifics of the use of the voter information card. I repeat, of course, that it's the voter information card not the voter identification card, an important distinction.
What in fact occurred in the 2011 general election is discussed on page 36 of the Chief Electoral Officer's report on that election, which I have in my hand, and which of course was distributed to all members of Parliament. On page 36, he describes the voter information card was used as proof of identity and address in a number of different locations during the 41st general election in 2011, including 745 polling stations on aboriginal reserves, a large number of polling stations in seniors' residences served by mobile polls, and also in a much smaller number of student residences, and he provides further details.
But this was in three specific narrow cases. He mentions in the case of students that in fact only a small number were able to take advantage of this. Many did not actually receive their cards, an item that also arises because we don't know where they live, and therefore can't issue voter information cards to them. It's an issue that also arises in the youth report that he provided.
That doesn't change the fact that for the country as a whole, the error rate is extraordinarily high for the voter information card. The voter information card, according to page 28 of this very same report, has an accuracy rate not of 90%—the preliminary list on which the voter information card is based—but of 93%. That's as to the person, so they got you right and didn't put somebody else down. They didn't put a deceased person on the list. The other 7% are people who aren't citizens, who are deceased, or where there's just simply an information error.
However, when it comes to the person's address—which is vital because this is being used, as I've just said, as proof of location of residence—the accuracy drops to 84%, a 16% error rate.
He goes on to say—and I'm quoting the Chief Electoral Officer here, all right? So I'm not misleading people, Mr. Scott. I'm quoting the report. “The currency of the lists in 10 ridings was estimated to have dropped to less than 75 percent.”
Now let's be clear about that. He doesn't say what dropped to 75%. I suspect that's accuracy with regard to the actual people. It may be—he doesn't explain—just accuracy with regard to addresses, in which case only 25% are getting the wrong information. It could be higher than that.
That constitutes a considerable problem that was not dealt with in the experiment he conducted. Nevertheless he indicated his intention to expand this across the country and make the use of that voter information card universal, including in ridings where 25% of them will send people to the wrong poll or will misinform people, etc.
That's the point at hand. Thank you.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Mr. Thorsteinson, I heard you say that you were a campaign chair in the federal election. Can you give us your political background on this issue? I think it is important that people understand where you're coming from.
11:45 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
Mr. Chair, full disclosure, I've been a political activist for some 41 years now and a campaign manager, not a chair, three times at the federal level and three times at the provincial level.
11:45 a.m.
David MacKenzie
I want to get—
11:45 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
I know, I'm getting to that.
Anyway, my campaign experience is with the New Democratic Party and that's a straight answer. However, my views on Canadian values I think are shared by all political parties.
11:45 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
As I said earlier, we have an annual convention. We have a mandate on all kinds of issues. In fairness—
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Past President, National Pensioners Federation
I was talking of personal experience. In years gone by, I've been a campaign manager. After my retirement in 2008, I became the president of this federation. I'm now past-president. But certainly I ceased my campaign manager experience upon retirement. I no longer manage campaigns.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal