Bill C-76 (Historical)

Elections Modernization Act

An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to make certain consequential amendments

This enactment amends the Canada Elections Act to establish spending limits for third parties and political parties during a defined period before the election period of a general election held on a day fixed under that Act. It also establishes measures to increase transparency regarding the participation of third parties in the electoral process. Among other things that it does in this regard, the enactment
(a) adds reporting requirements for third parties engaging in partisan activities, partisan advertising, and election surveys to the reporting requirements for third parties engaging in election advertising;
(b) creates an obligation for third parties to open a separate bank account for expenses related to the matters referred to in paragraph (a); and
(c) creates an obligation for political parties and third parties to identify themselves in partisan advertising during the defined period before the election period.
The enactment also amends the Act to implement measures to reduce barriers to participation and increase accessibility. Among other things that it does in this regard, the enactment
(a) establishes a Register of Future Electors in which Canadian citizens 14 to 17 years of age may consent to be included;
(b) broadens the application of accommodation measures to all persons with a disability, irrespective of its nature;
(c) creates a financial incentive for registered parties and candidates to take steps to accommodate persons with a disability during an election period;
(d) amends some of the rules regarding the treatment of candidates’ expenses, including the rules related to childcare expenses, expenses related to the care of a person with a disability and litigation expenses;
(e) amends the rules regarding the treatment of nomination contestants’ and leadership contestants’ litigation expenses and personal expenses;
(f) allows Canadian Forces electors access to several methods of voting, while also adopting measures to ensure the integrity of the vote;
(g) removes limitations on public education and information activities conducted by the Chief Electoral Officer;
(h) removes two limitations on voting by non-resident electors: the requirement that they have been residing outside Canada for less than five consecutive years and the requirement that they intend to return to Canada to resume residence in the future; and
(i) extends voting hours on advance polling days.
The enactment also amends the Act to modernize voting services, facilitate enforcement and improve various aspects of the administration of elections and of political financing. Among other things that it does in this regard, the enactment
(a) removes the assignment of specific responsibilities set out in the Act to specific election officers by creating a generic category of election officer to whom all those responsibilities may be assigned;
(b) limits election periods to a maximum of 50 days;
(c) removes administrative barriers in order to facilitate the hiring of election officers;
(d) authorizes the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to provide the Chief Electoral Officer with information about permanent residents and foreign nationals for the purpose of updating the Register of Electors;
(e) removes the prohibition on the Chief Electoral Officer authorizing the notice of confirmation of registration (commonly known as a “voter information card”) as identification;
(f) replaces, in the context of voter identification, the option of attestation for residence with an option of vouching for identity and residence;
(g) removes the requirement for electors’ signatures during advance polls, changes procedures for the closing of advance polls and allows for counting ballots from advance polls one hour before the regular polls close;
(h) replaces the right or obligation to take an oath with a right or obligation to make a solemn declaration, and streamlines the various declarations that electors may have the right or obligation to make under specific circumstances;
(i) relocates the Commissioner of Canada Elections to within the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, and provides that the Commissioner is to be appointed by the Chief Electoral Officer, after consultation with the Director of Public Prosecutions, for a non-renewable term of 10 years;
(j) provides the Commissioner of Canada Elections with the authority to impose administrative monetary penalties for contraventions of provisions of Parts 16, 17 and 18 of the Act and certain other provisions of the Act;
(k) provides the Commissioner of Canada Elections with the authority to lay charges;
(l) provides the Commissioner of Canada Elections with the power to apply for a court order requiring testimony or a written return;
(m) clarifies offences relating to
(i) the publishing of false statements,
(ii) participation by non-Canadians in elections, including inducing electors to vote or refrain from voting, and
(iii) impersonation; and
(n) implements a number of measures to harmonize and streamline political financing monitoring and reporting.
The enactment also amends the Act to provide for certain requirements with regard to the protection of personal information for registered parties, eligible parties and political parties that are applying to become registered parties, including the obligation for the party to adopt a policy for the protection of personal information and to publish it on its Internet site.
The enactment also amends the Parliament of Canada Act to prevent the calling of a by-election when a vacancy in the House of Commons occurs within nine months before the day fixed for a general election under the Canada Elections Act.
It also amends the Public Service Employment Act to clarify that the maximum period of employment of casual workers in the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer — 165 working days in one calendar year — applies to those who are appointed by the Commissioner of Canada Elections.
Finally, the enactment contains transitional provisions, makes consequential amendments to other Acts and repeals the Special Voting Rules.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Yes, I'd certainly agree. I would certainly support this motion, but as I think I mentioned in the last meeting, we also need to get the Chief Electoral Officer and the Privacy Commissioner here to explain their interpretation of what Bill C-76 is going to require parties and individual politicians to do with regard to data protection. That could be a follow-on from YouTube.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Sure. I'll just say “invite senior representatives of YouTube to explain the company's decision not to run political ads in the upcoming federal election, their refusal to comply with Bill C-76 and any other issues relevant to this committee”.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I had given notice of this on Tuesday. While we still have time here, I want to move a motion to invite senior representatives of YouTube to explain the company's decision not to run political ads in the upcoming federal election and their refusal to comply with Bill C-76.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

I would say that for many of the elements in both of your reports that have to do with elections, you can see those reflected, not entirely, but fairly closely, in both Bill C-76 and the announcement that we made with regard to protecting democracy.

On some of the other elements that are outside of my mandate, I will note that my colleague Minister Bains is conducting public consultations and will be coming out with a report specifically with regard to privacy and data and how companies use that. My understanding is that will be in the near term.

As I have said many times before, this is one of the great challenges we're facing right now. We have in many ways for a long time looked just at the tremendous benefits that social media and the digital world have brought us. I think 2016 was a real wake-up call for everyone around the world in terms of what was going on.

As in many moments in history, we now have to figure out exactly how to tackle this problem in a way that, on the one hand, continues to encourage the positive elements of social media—the ability for people to connect in ways they've never been able to connect before; the great democratizing abilities that it has in terms of sharing opinions and views, which I think is extraordinarily positive—and, on the other hand, mitigates the risks and the social harms that we see happening.

One of the things I have thought about over the past two years, the last year in particular, as a lot more of this stuff has come to light, is the fact that there have been very few times when we've had one industry that is so encompassing in so many aspects of our lives that it's difficult to attack it from just one position, whether it's democracy, privacy, public safety, law enforcement or whatever the case may be. We need to start thinking a bit more holistically about these digital giants and how we approach them.

That's where I think the work of your committee has been very helpful in terms of helping us think about some of these issues and how we manage them in a way that aligns with our values and our societal norms moving forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

I have a couple of comments for the minister, just before we close. The phrase that came to me before, when I saw the legislation, Bill C-76, was that we are bringing a knife to a gunfight. In reality, we're not even bringing a knife; we're bringing a panel to a gunfight.

The concern is around how, especially with some very clear recommendations in our report, 26 very clear recommendations that were very specific, we see very few of those being taken up by the minister. What has been talked about here in committee as a whole is that if expecting that social media platforms will act is your final point, isn't that supposed to make them treat it more seriously?

I'll just refer you to a quote from the Information Commissioner from the U.K., which was later reiterated by our own Privacy Commissioner. “I think the time for self-regulation is over,” Denham said. “That ship has sailed.” I guess I just wonder—and this is for the minister—why we still let them self-regulate and expect them to do the right thing when they haven't, up to this point.

I guess what I'm concerned about, what I think all at this committee are concerned about, is that, as has been mentioned before, we're in a Cold War—the Cold War reference was brought up—but we're in a digital reality and we're still treating it like a Cold War problem.

With those comments, do you think you're doing enough?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

I think it's important to look at the strength of our electoral legislation and to recognize that in Bill C-76. That's why we put in the provision about the malicious use of a computer and how that is not allowed to happen. We do have a strong electoral system and strong legislation here in Canada. We have also strengthened the rules with regard to third parties, in terms of advertising, in terms of how they disclose their finances, which I think is really important.

I have confidence in our elections legislation domestically.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

With regard to regulating social media, I actually do want to clarify that in fact I did regulate them through Bill C-76, through the online ad registry that they will have to comply with in the upcoming election. I think that is a really important step, and it's the first time, to my knowledge, that this has happened internationally.

With regard to assurances from Facebook, I don't have the assurances that give me full confidence that they are going to be completely seized with this and doing everything necessary, which is why I continue to have conversations with them, and have highlighted—

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

That is an excellent question. Since Elections Canada is an independent government organization, that may be a question for the chief electoral officer. However, I can say that, in Bill C-76, we have given back the power to the chief electoral officer to inform Canadians on elections. If that is something that interests him, he could talk to Canadians about it.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

With respect to Bill C-76, the focus is on transparency of advertising and that's really important, but there was an interesting comment when Mr. Zimmer and I were in Washington last July for a round table. Senator Warner said when they started looking into this issue, advertising was their main focus and that turned out to be the tip of the iceberg. The hijacking of the algorithms themselves was the real problem, whether it's the Internet Research Agency troll farms, or some other organizations'. How do you see the steps that your office has taken as a solution to that problem?

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I appreciate that. So within your mandate, we have Bill C-76, which rightfully creates a registry of ads, both in the writ and pre-writ periods. Is there any confidence in the conversations you've had with Facebook and others that they will ensure that database is as accessible as possible, with journalists in mind specifically?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Yes, so that committee would make that decision.

One thing I want to clarify, because this is the second time you've mentioned it, is in Bill C-76 third parties are now required to have separate bank accounts so they can account for all the money coming in. I think that was a really important issue to put forward, particularly to account for where money is coming from.

With regard to the vulnerabilities that I mentioned yesterday and often on this topic, you can pull those directly from the CSE report on cyber-threats to our democracy. They highlight very clearly that the principal threats with regard to cyber-interference are with regard to people mostly: politicians, political parties and the media, any time there is human interaction. As often is the case, those individuals and actors on the one hand may not be practising what is called good cyber-hygiene two-factor authentication and ensure they're protecting their accounts as well as possible, but also with regard to being susceptible to influence strategies and campaigns. When talking about those vulnerabilities, those are the ones I was referring to.

With regard to Bill C-76, on the whole I'm quite proud of the legislation because I think its primary objective is to ensure that all Canadians have the possibility to vote. I think that was really important in extending vouching for our most vulnerable Canadians, in ensuring that the voter information card can be used to establish residency, which we know, for example, for single senior women, is often a barrier to voting because they don't have those pieces of residence information.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Also, I want to say that I really enjoyed your speech yesterday at the AI event. It was very informal. I think you should go with that format more, even when you come to committees. You do it so well. I wanted to compliment you on that.

You talked a lot about vulnerabilities. That was a major theme for you. Of course, as the opposition, we very much take seriously our responsibility to hold the government to account, in terms of safeguarding the election. I would say that at almost every step, we feel as though the government has failed, and not gone far enough in taking the steps required to safeguard the election.

I would use examples from Bill C-76.

The social platform registry, the most basic of information, in my opinion, didn't perhaps go far enough, in terms of protecting Canadians, and providing information, as well as data management.

My colleague made mention of the foreign interference aspect. I've said this several times before. We, as the official opposition, put forward over 200 amendments. Many of them were rejected. As I have said previously, I feel very strongly that what we came out with in Bill C-76 was a slap on the hand for foreign interference. You know, “This is bad. You shouldn't do this,” rather than legislating specific mechanisms, such as segregated bank accounts, which would make foreign interference impossible, from a monetary perspective.

More relevant to what my colleague, the Honourable Peter Kent, mentioned, is the funding outside of the writ and pre-writ periods, which is really still open season. It is, as we've come to see, severely affecting other parts of our democracy, including both immigration and—something very dear to my heart, as an Albertan—pipeline approval.

That's just the beginning. I certainly won't go into our positions, in terms of the vulnerabilities created by non-resident voting, voter identification cards and the changes to vouching in Bill C-76. This is something you've said is very important to you and the government. Yet we see that the steps to absolutely go to the furthest length possible to protect these electoral processes are not being taken. It was touched upon yesterday. My colleague, Mr. Saini, mentioned it briefly in his questioning earlier. It was mentioned by a former member of the Liberal government and the Liberal cabinet, someone I have much respect for and who is a former colleague of mine from foreign affairs, Allan Rock. It was in regard to, again, the management of social media platforms.

Of course, we are always looking for a balance in society. As I stated in my testimony at PROC last week, we have to rely on these corporations, with the objective to maximize shareholder value, to take it upon themselves to self-regulate. I understand that opens up questions such as free speech, etc. Hee did mention a concern that perhaps more than nudging needs to take place. My concern is also with your response, or what seemed to be your response. I'll give you the opportunity to address that. You seem to want to put it upon PROC to do a study, giving you coverage: if you decide to take action with legislation, you can say, “Well, the committee did a study, and this is what they told me.”

I'm asking you if you are ready and willing, in regard to the social media platform, to make the hard decisions and take the hard actions, not six months from now, but now, please.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

In Bill C-76 there was a tightening based on the recommendations from the former CEO of Elections Canada to tighten the language surrounding false statements made against candidates. The previous clause in the Elections Act was too vague and unenforceable. We tightened it up, so it would be based on statements you could prove or disprove.

For example, if someone accused candidate X of having a criminal record, that's something you could prove or disprove. The mechanism, with regard to our elections legislation, is a complaint filed with the Commissioner of Canada Elections to which it would then respond.

The resources to the commissioner have been increased. Another very important element of this is that the commissioner has been both moved back into Elections Canada, but also empowered to initiate and lay charges as well as compel testimony. The powers have been strengthened, so the commissioner can be more effective in applying our legislation.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Again, we have the Commissioner of Canada Elections who would be responsible for investigating that. It is not something that has come up, and I would caution against those allegations, but I do think it is important to note that in Bill C-76, which was seen at the procedure and House affairs committee—and I see Ms. Kusie here who played a substantial role in that—we were able to have significant all-party consensus with regard to banning foreign funding with regard to third parties in our elections. That has been a very productive engagement.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Bill C-76 doesn't cover foreign charitable funding through the CRA.