Evidence of meeting #22 for Electoral Reform in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was schools.
A video is available from Parliament.
NDP
President, Civix
They're not the best example because they're not proportional?
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Right. They're STV. We talked to witnesses from Germany and Scotland this morning, anyway...
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
The question I had about what you said around urgency is well taken. What would you do? If we want to have a comprehensive, quality process that engages Canadians, as everybody who comes to this table says we need to do, whether they're for a referendum or not, what would you do with the $10 million if it were sitting right here, right now, or some portion of it, to make this process better and to better engage young people?
President, Civix
Usually that's preoccupying enough. I don't know how we'd spend $10 million—well, actually, I would.
NDP
President, Civix
If I were going to do it really well, and the timelines were different, the first thing we'd do is to train our teacher network. I'd be cautious of.... In my experience—and I can be totally wrong, and I might get some mean things—some people are really keen and eager about a certain type of electoral system, but don't have knowledge about the others.
President, Civix
Exactly.
And the money that you put in would guarantee you the number of educators that would then give you that guaranteed level of delivery. You could offer it to everyone and see what other delivery there is.
Then I would do two things, and this is what we proposed to the government.
NDP
President, Civix
Have citizens' student assemblies, the point being that they become experts on the system and are excited and go back into their communities and because they're kids, and you go to somewhere like Red Deer; Trail, B.C.; or anywhere like that, and they'll be on the front page of their papers. Then they'll go back into their schools and help facilitate conversations on electoral reform. Then you could run a classroom consultation that's available to everybody. In these days of modern day stuff, there are no videos put out by PCO/Democratic Institutions, or anyone.
President, Civix
A handbook is a.... Anyway, I'm not going to be mean, but I didn't see that as a resource for an educator. Just taking things from the Library of Parliament, and putting them in, doesn't help. What's the hook of the lesson? What's this?
You also need to know government 101 before you get into electoral reform. You need to know why elections even matter. So all these kinds of civics 101 things, I think, are part of the bigger conversation that you suggest, which is, let's crack open our democracy.
I'm non-partisan and do appreciate what you have said, but in the past politics you've also said that politics is what's wrong with our democracy.
I bet the first thing that people will complain about is what they've seen in politics that turns them off, and you could use that as a hook and then get them into questions of whether more females would be elected, or that parties would be less mean to each other. Those are all different ways you could hook people into this conversation. But I do think there's an impetus to get into this, because no other leader before has said—
Liberal
Conservative
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I join with all my colleagues around the table in applauding the witnesses for their presentations, their commitment and the passion they show when they speak to this issue, and undoubtedly, as they do their work within their respective organizations.
Mr. Gunn, congratulations. Like many of my colleagues, I have also participated in meetings with students in schools. I want to congratulate you on all your hard work, on your analysis of the situation and, much like the two other witnesses, on recognizing the importance of education. You've given us, and all politicians, a real lesson here today. I hope the committee will have the maturity to properly document all your comments in the drafting of its final report.
Ms. Hilderman, I have been a member of this committee for a week. I wasn't part of its past work, but I did have a chance to follow that work from a distance and read a lot of the literature. This is the first time I have seen a non-partisan citizen engagement organization refrain from taking a stance on this issue and remain completely neutral. You could have easily fallen into that trap when you answered the last question, but you didn't take the bait and still remained neutral. For that, I applaud you.
I find your document to be quite interesting. It explores all aspects and lets people objectively form their own opinion. As politicians, we are all biased, whatever our opinion may be of these issues. We all want to improve our democracy, but we all have our own interests in that regard.
I have a proposal to make. If, one day, we had someone else in the position of Minister for Democratic Reform and he or she needed someone to provide advice or host meetings, we would seek someone who is completely neutral, that is, someone like you. Your presentation was fantastic in that regard. I particularly liked the passage that reads, “Yet dissatisfaction with how democracy functions is not only a Canadian phenomenon”.
It is often implied that Canada is the only place having problems in this area. However, if you look at global trends surrounding voter turnout, it's declining everywhere—and I want to stress this point—regardless of the voting method used. Indeed, this is not only a Canadian phenomenon. It's wrong to say that a mixed member proportional system will solve everything.
You emphasized this nicely in the passage that reads, “Indeed, countries who use other electoral systems continue to have citizens who express frustration with politics. In other words, changing the electoral system does not guarantee a significant boost in satisfaction with the way democracy works.” This explains the importance of education that you have all mentioned.
Mr. Vézina, I want to make a small correction to something you said. A party does not win a majority government in Canada with just 32% or 33% of the vote, but rather 39% or 40% of the vote. In our case, we experienced this, since we won 32% or 33% of the vote, and we are in opposition.
You talked a lot about people who support a mixed member proportional system or any proportional system and people who say that their vote doesn't count under the current system. However, when we spoke to people who live in Scotland—as Mr. Gunn mentioned, and rightly so—they told us that despite declining voter turnout, the issues are what really had an impact on their interest.
You indicated this in your presentation, but you only added this aspect at the very end. Experts have expressed their views on the main reasons for the public’s lack of interest in politics. Personally, I haven't heard many people saying they thought their vote didn't count. Rather, a small group of people really interested in politics are the ones saying that after elections. When they're happy with the results, of course there's no longer a problem.
I'm wondering if you could expand on the points mentioned on page 4 of your document, aspects that really have a direct impact on people's willingness to get out and vote, regardless of their age group. Could you clarify that for us?
Liberal
Strategic Advisor, Institut du Nouveau Monde, Institut du Nouveau Monde
Okay.
Mr. Rayes, you're looking at page 4 of our brief? Is that right?
Conservative
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I'll have another five-minute period later during which you can answer my question.
Strategic Advisor, Institut du Nouveau Monde, Institut du Nouveau Monde
You said page 4 of the brief, right?
