Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 7th, 2014

[Voices]

Yes.

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

This is going to be a big problem, because in the past, as you know, if you do have just a post office box.... I have one. It's to the point now where I get my bills electronically, so I now have to go to my utility and get a paper bill in order for me to vote. I can't imagine what it's like for many people in residences, in their own dwellings, who are of the age, say, around 60, or in their late fifties or that sort of thing. It's going to be very difficult for them to do.

I'll quote from your input, and thank you, because some of the points are very good.

Mr. Kerwin, I'm going to quote from yours. You say, “A senior in his or her late eighties is not likely to have a driver's licence, probably doesn't have a passport anymore, and a health card in some jurisdictions has your picture on it, but in Ontario at least, it doesn't have your address.” That's one very important point that's left out of this debate all the time. You say that the bills for the utilities that they use, like electricity and gas, will be in name of their children or the assisted living residence.

A lot of times, seniors of that age are vouched for by their kids.

Ms. Eng, I'll start with you for your comment on that.

[Susan Eng]

Yes, you're absolutely right. For the whole list that we talk about, it's that they're not 39 different things; many of them are the same thing, such as utility bills from various different utilities. As soon as we get into online billing, which is coming and is enforced under threat of paying for a paper bill and, of course, the elimination of home mail delivery, it's going to make it that much more difficult to have ready at hand something that's going to have both photo ID and your address on the same card.

It is an important feature. It highlights the concerns that our members have about all of the provisions of the bill. I wouldn't say it was our members' most important concern, however, because the most important concern is actually the transparency and the fairness of the whole process. The highest number of responses was actually in relation to parties who won the last election nominating the most senior of the local election officials.

It's the process that matters, not the specific numbers of people who would need to be vouched for. That just represents the fact that there is a group of people who will necessarily be disadvantaged. They don't really care if it's a huge number or just 100,000 or 500,000 people who will be affected. They think that process should not be so unfair as to actually suppress voters.

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

Before I get to Mr. Kerwin, there's this one other tidbit. I've been involved in elections now as someone on the ballot for 10 years, and longer than that as a volunteer. Would you agree with me when I say that for people who are above the age of 50, that voter—I know we keep being corrected that it's a voter information card, but to these people, this is an identification card.

[Susan Eng]

It totally is.

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

There are so many people who really rely on this and truly believe, it's ingrained within them, that this is their ticket to vote.

[Susan Eng]

Yes. I—

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

I'm sorry, but I'm just going to go to Mr. Kerwin.

[Pat Kerwin]

Yes, because when they go to wherever the place is where there's a ballot, that's how they know they're supposed to be there. They all bring it with them because they say this is what shows that they have the right to vote there.

This is what we're dealing with. Identification that may exist may be out of date. This is what I was trying to say. They've moved because they got ill or maybe they've even moved between provinces since the last time they were enumerated. I think this is really important.

On the point you make about going to Internet billing, Rogers was going to charge me $2 to get my bill at home every month, so I did switch to online billing. All the companies are going to do this now that Canada Post is putting up its bills. Also, this problem with Canada Post generally, with regard to any home deliveries, is another big issue.

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

Monsieur Prud'homme.

[Danis Prud'homme]

Between the three of us, we represent about 800,000 individuals. When we say our members have some issues with the current bill, I think we know what we are talking about. We meet with members of our various chapters.

Our network has 840 chapters across the province. People are telling us that, whenever they get wind of developments, they talk about them and give us comments. Being recognized by someone is, in many cases, what they need because that's the easiest thing for them.

On the other hand, you said that the card I mentioned was not an ID. However, that's what it is considered to be. On the card, it is clearly indicated that, if your name is not on it, you do not reside at the address in question and you will not be able to vote. So this card is used in our province as an ID, whether we like it or not. That's an issue for us.

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

I like what you said earlier and I'm probably attributing...I can't remember who said this, but someone said this is indeed a solution that's looking for a problem that doesn't necessarily exist. I think that was you, Mr. Kerwin.

Do you think this system could be improved, given some of the irregularities that happened? It's not chalking it up to fraud; it's just irregularities as we've seen in some of the Supreme Court musings about it a short time ago. They're not all about fraud. Are you legitimately surprised that they just threw the whole vouching system out, given the importance of the people you represent?

[Pat Kerwin]

Absolutely, yes.

I would like to see this committee or Parliament talk about the problem of voter turnout. That's the issue. It's not just for old people. I've already said we tend to get out to vote. This is the issue you should be addressing and trying to find a solution for on a cooperative basis.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You have about 10 seconds, Mr. Simms.

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

It was a pleasure to talk to you today. I'm of the party of George Brown, by the way. On behalf of George and others, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I always look like the mean guy. I try to do it as smoothly as I can.

We're going to go to Mr. Lukiwski, for a four-minute round, please.

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

Thank you very much.

I have a number of questions, but only four minutes, unfortunately.

I want to start with Ms. Eng.

I'm not sure if I heard you correctly, but if I did, to me it's quite serious. I thought you said, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that you are aware of voter suppression campaigns against seniors attempting to vote. Did you say that, or something like that? I'd like some clarification.

[Susan Eng]

No, I'm not saying that.

I've seen at voting stations the idea that you can disrupt the process and make it more difficult for a group of people to vote, on the theory that if you make it disruptive enough, some people will just turn around and go home. I have seen that happen. I'm not sure how widespread it is, or, in fact, if it happens everywhere, but it is one of those kinds of things where we should not be putting more barriers in front of people who may be fragile, who maybe can't wait in line that long, and so on. Rather than make it more difficult for them to vote, we should make it easier for them to vote.

That was my only point.

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

Sorry to go back to that again. Specifically, what have you seen? Because that's why there are elections officials at the polling station, to prevent that sort of action from taking place.

[Susan Eng]

Well, that's why the elections officials are important. They can't get around to everybody. They're not as well trained as they could be in all cases, and that's why when you're worried about the irregularities—as to a previous question—you want to make sure you have well-trained elections officials who are in fact impartial and appear to be impartial as well. I think that's why that role is so important.

It can happen that people are disrupting the voting process. That's why I'm just saying that any kind of measure that allows people to vote without interference, that makes it easy, that makes sure they can guarantee their own identity, should be allowed rather than restricted.

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

I'll leave it at that, but clearly if you've seen campaigns, or if you've seen instances where people were trying to disrupt someone from voting, that should have been reported immediately.

Let me just point out, because it seems a lot of witnesses are saying that the voter information card should be used as legitimate IDs, that it's certainly far, far from perfect. I'll give you one example, but I could go on for the rest of the meeting with other examples.

In my first election, in 2004, several—when I say several, it's probably in excess of 100 to 200—people in my riding were given wrong information on voter information cards. Why? They lived in a certain area, but they picked up their mail in a neighbouring riding. That happens quite frequently throughout Canada. They picked up their mail; there was a voter information card, and it had the postal number from their Moose Jaw address. Based on postal numbers in identification, they were told to go to a different polling station. Luckily none of them did, because most of the members of those border communities had been long-time residents and know where they're supposed to vote. They know they didn't vote in Moose Jaw. They know they went to a polling station, but the point is all of the information was incorrect.

There's more than just my example. There are 308 ridings across Canada, many of them in rural Canada, that would be exactly the same situation.

I think there's a responsibility for all individuals. Yes they have the right to vote, and I will defend that to my dying days, but I also believe the sanctity of the vote has to be protected, and that means that you have to be able to prove proper identification and proper address.

[Susan Eng]

I do agree it is important to have identification and to prove who you are and that you're entitled to vote at that station. In fact, the kind of irregularity, or inefficiency, or deficiency that you're talking about can apply to all of the pieces of ID that you're talking about. You know utility bills can be sent to the wrong place. Many driver's licences are out of date as to the address, and so on. It's not as if every one of those pieces of identification and their systems are absolutely perfect.

I think that there is work to be done to make sure that the voters list is more accurate, more up to date, so that the voter identification cards are correct. It's up to the citizens themselves to try to correct that information on the list. But given that there are possibilities there are deficiencies and so on doesn't mean we should throw out the process all together. I think what we want to do is improve it so that it's more reliable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Mr. Christopherson, for four minutes please.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you all very much for taking the time to be here today.

I have to tell you, listening to Mr. Kerwin, I can't help but sort of reflect on this bizarro world we're in right now dealing with this bill: there's actually a formal bill in front of the House that is likely, within weeks, to become law; the Chief Electoral Officer was not consulted and is opposed; the previous Chief Electoral Officer has said they're opposed and there should be major changes or withdraw it; the Commissioner of Canada Elections was not consulted and also says that the bill should be either dramatically changed or withdrawn, and the previous Commissioner of Canada Elections, and we can go on.

It's also a shame, and we've seen this already with other presentations, aboriginal women who were here earlier come to my mind.... It's a shame that we aren't doing exactly what you said, Mr. Kerwin, looking at a series of proposals and talking about them, putting them to people and asking if it helps. Does this help people to vote, does it make it easier, does it strengthen our democracy?

Instead you're here today, as were the aboriginal women who were here recently, fighting just to get a fair shake in the election and trying to defend yourselves against the new law that's going to hurt you.

The whole scenario that we're in is just completely mind-boggling. I mean you almost have to be in Parliament to believe that this could be the real world.

Having said all of that, I want to focus a bit on the voter information card, because more and more, we're getting people coming in and saying that it either should be a voter identification card, or we should actually be providing a voter identification card free of charge by the government to the people to help them to vote.

Here's my point about the voter information card. The information that's on it comes from all the various databases that Elections Canada could reach into. The current Chief Electoral Officer has said that the most accurate document, certainly more than driver's licence, is the voter information card.

It makes common sense. You don't have to be an expert in the field. If you have one database to draw on, and that's the driver's licence database, you're only going to have accurate information as good as that one database. But when you're reaching into virtually every other database that Elections Canada can tap into, the odds are that this document is going to be the most accurate and the most up to date. That's what's so frustrating. Something that would be a help to Canadians, a voter identification card, is being rejected by this government, and we know it's deliberate.

Do you have further thoughts on the voter information card in terms of the current proposal that's in front of us? What do you think about the idea that Elections Canada and the government could undertake providing people with an actual ID card, exactly what many Canadians on election day believe that they have in their hand? That's for whoever wants to jump in.

[Susan Eng]

I think it would be a big help, because we wouldn't be arguing about the weakest link in the electoral process, that of identifying yourself and not being able to use whatever else you have in your possession for identification. In circumstances where, because of the stage in your life you no longer have the other pieces of ID, there should be something that you as a voter could use.

Indeed in Ontario, for people who don't drive, they are offering government-issued photo ID for those individuals. They partner with the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, for example, so that people can get an ID card.

I guess Canadians have always resisted government ID cards, but I think at this point, because it's required for everything we do, including exercising our franchise, it would probably be better received than being told that all the pieces of information that government sends to them are not useful. I think that's an important thing.

The only other point I want to add here is that even if the vouching and voter information card provisions were withdrawn from the bill, there are other significant pieces of the bill that are equally important. We would not be content with just having that one section eliminated.