Electoral Reform Committee on June 21st, 2016

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I was just trying to reflect on what little experience I've had. The committee can certainly request to allocate funds for travel and for witnesses to come before us, but I think allocating funds beyond the very noble pursuits that were talked about goes beyond our mandate. First, I don't know if we have the power to do it, and second, I'm not sure I'm comfortable doing it, even if we do have the power.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We don't have an exact answer.

Mr. Thériault, do you have anything to add?

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Since people seem receptive to the motion, it may be worthwhile for the committee to speak as one to the people concerned to find out whether it's possible. It would be an indication that committee members can vote in favour of the motion or refer it to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. That wouldn't be a problem for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I'm told there's a problem. The motion is not aimed at anyone in particular and does not refer to the committee.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I can rectify that.

I have spoken with the parliamentary secretary many times about our intention to put forward such a motion. I was told that I could do so as part of our work this afternoon. I am putting forward the motion because the committee is adopting routine motions. It's thus clear that I am addressing this committee.

It's a routine motion issue. An operating budget must be allocated to the committee now or in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The clerk could find out about the wording and the admissibility of the motion. Mr. Thériault, would you give her time to find out whether the motion is admissible in its current form, or do you just want us to vote?

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chair, you are giving me an opportunity to say two things.

Since we have not discussed this, I don't know whether my colleagues will consider this request as legitimate. We can look into the form of the motion, but we will not have a debate both on the form and on the substance. Do the committee members agree with the substance of the motion? As for the form of the motion, we can adapt it. We have been adapting other motions for a while.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I am being told that the chair decides whether a motion is admissible. If it is agreeable, and to take the time to clarify certain elements, we will check whether the motion is admissible in its current form. If not, you could always change it and move it again.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

That's okay with me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Thériault.

Do the members want to discuss any particular elements of the committee's agenda?

Ms. Romanado, go ahead.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Since quite a bit of information is being sent to the subcommittee, which will then impact the calendar and the setting of the calendar, my suggestion is that we submit a motion to select a date for the next subcommittee meeting at a time that would be mutually beneficial for the members of the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Do you have a date to propose?

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

My suggestion would be Wednesday, June 29, in the morning, since there might be quite a few of us here on the Hill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, I believe there's something happening that day, apart from the meeting of our steering committee.

Your proposal is that we meet on Wednesday morning, June 29, at a time to be set by the chair. Is everyone in agreement with that suggestion?

We will go to Mr. Cullen, Mr. Boulerice, and then Madame May.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

There are two things. First, I don't know about the availability situation, but I thought tomorrow morning or later today might be a good idea. The only reason is that once the subcommittee meets, it starts the ball rolling in terms of the clerk's ability to start inviting witnesses.

My suspicion is that in that initial list of witnesses, which the parties have all submitted, there will be some clear common ground, people who are clearly the ones we'd like to get started first. Some of them—not all of them, but some of them—are located within a couple of hours' drive or within Ottawa itself.

If we were to get together next week, as you've said, with President Obama coming, there will be a number of MPs in town. Our first committee meeting with witnesses could actually be struck within the week, because normally when committees do those first couple of meetings, there is a certain pro forma group of witnesses we could see.

That was my suggestion. If the steering committee could get together even sooner than that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Can I interrupt?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I think it's possible to start meetings next week with some witnesses who could appear on very short notice. The analysts could speak to us for 90 minutes.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

You just shocked the analysts, Chair. Well done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

What I mean is that they could present to us in a 90-minute session—sorry about that—and then I believe the committees directorate could come and speak to us about the use of technology in this process.

We could do that. Let's say the subcommittee met Tuesday afternoon or something. We could have a meeting...or Tuesday morning, and we could have a meeting Tuesday afternoon. We could also invite Mr. Mayrand and Mr. Kingsley. They could appear on very short notice. We could hit the ground running next week.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

That would be my intention. Depending on the outcome of the committee's deliberations about what we are doing through July and August, if we want to start that process, the sooner we let the subcommittee make those decisions, the better.

Perhaps I can add one thing, Chair. I don't know if it came around in the discussion we had before about the online participation of Canadians, but there was a motion just beneath that. From some of our conversations with Elections Canada, it appears the committee has to invite Elections Canada to prefer witnesses to us, and I think it would be appropriate for us to move a motion.

I think we need to have an official request from the committee asking Elections Canada for any insight they have on witnesses they think would help. In our conversations, Elections Canada's best experience is actually international—well, not their best; their best experience is here in Canada—but hey have extensive experience internationally dealing with other electoral districts, other countries.

The motion, marked as number 3, is that we seek a list of witness recommendations from the Chief Electoral Officer for the committee's consideration, including individuals and organizations with expertise related to potential new voting technologies, international cases, increasing public engagement and participation in voting, and others at his discretion. Other than from the committee, they will not entertain a request for witnesses.

That's the motion we wanted to bring today, to at least....

It's the third one on the list.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Do you want to move it, Mr. Cullen?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

It's our second motion, but it's under No. 3. It has to do with the chief electoral officer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have Ms. Romanado's motion. Can you read it again, please?

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

I'd like to add to that, and I'm sorry that the debate went a little bit sideways.

I'd like to add my suggestion that the steering committee set a date and time for next week, with a meeting of the whole committee the following day. We could start moving along with perhaps a presentation from the analysts as well as with witnesses who might be available to meet.

Under the same notion, we could make sure that all suggestions for witnesses are submitted by this Thursday, if they haven't already been submitted. That way we can start to get a better understanding of the number of witnesses we'll have to invite and we can start laying out the agenda and the work plan that would be required so that when we do meet as a committee, we will have that information available and can hit the ground running.