Electoral Reform Committee on Sept. 20th, 2016

[Prof. Bryan Schwartz]

If all the parties agreed, we could say okay, everybody agrees; it's good. My answer is no, because the political class as a whole may have interests that are different from those of the people of Canada as a whole. If everybody votes to keep expanding Parliament and so on and so forth, it may be good for the political class. The first law of democratic reform is that it tends to favour incumbents of all stripes, so I think there would still be a need to have it vetted through a referendum.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Cullen, please.

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

This is very interesting. One thing about the notion of switching every once in a while being healthy....

I'm putting this to you, Mr. Schwartz. You talked about switching political parties, but then, when you referenced the European context, you talked about switching some of the ideas and ideologies that come into government as being more important than whether you switched political parties.

Canadians went to the polls last year and changed the political parties in power, yet we're left with the same climate targets, apparently. The idea didn't necessarily change on a fundamental question.

More to that point, if I'm a voter in regions of the country in which under first past the post I see no representation—I'm in downtown Toronto and I'm a Conservative—why am I meant to be satisfied simply because the country switched? How am I any happier, if I still don't have representation for my values and my voice?

[Prof. Bryan Schwartz]

First past the post's single biggest weakness is that most votes are wasted. That's a pretty big negative—

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

Right; that's a pretty big negative.

[Prof. Bryan Schwartz]

—but there are a great many positives, and you have to keep comparing with the alternative.

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

Yes.

[Prof. Bryan Schwartz]

If I think this is a system in which I lost this time, but my guy's getting in next time—and I mean “guy” in a gender-inclusive form—

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

That's part of the problem.

[Prof. Bryan Schwartz]

—well, then I have hope: okay, we didn't win this time, but we went from 25% to 35% and maybe we'll get in next time. One of the weaknesses of first past the post is potentially mitigated if people believe, “Yes, I didn't win this time, but my voice.... Next time, my team wins.”

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to...

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

I know it was just a small slip, yet an important one. If we want to take it through another value lens, “my guy didn't win this time, but my guy might win next time”, Canada's ranking 64th in the world in terms of women represented in our Parliament.

I'm going to extend this over to what Mr. Gibson and Ms. Smoke talked about in terms of fairness. The committee is going to get sick of my referring to it, but I think it's rather insightful that Elections Manitoba just did a study on what happened in the last provincial election. Why people didn't vote is a question we're all engaged with here. Why didn't they vote? Why did 40-plus per cent not vote?

What they found in their bit of research, released today, was that people didn't think their votes could count, or thought that they wouldn't count. They felt, “I vote a certain way in this riding” or “I vote for a certain kind of person that my community doesn't want to vote for, so I'm not going to go out to the polls”.

Ms. Smoke, you talked about coming from a very unique perspective, a first nations perspective. Your mom instructed you as my mom instructed me to be involved, yet many first nations people, many people not seeing themselves reflected—women, first nations, young people, poor people—don't bother voting.

Can we do better? How can we do better?

[Gina Smoke]

Knowing that a vote will count.... Even now, I live in a community where I am probably a minority. I live in Charleswood. I vote NDP, although if I put up a sign on my lawn, I am swamped by all the Conservative signs. I know that when I vote, my vote is not going to count in my own area.

Living on the reserve is pretty much the same thing. In these communities, for years we have felt like we didn't matter. It wasn't until 1960 that aboriginal women were finally able to vote. I was stunned by that. I guess that is why my mother's perspective was that it was important; they were always on us about how important it was to vote. I talk to my kids about it all the time, and they said the same thing to me this time around: “Why should we vote when we know it is not going to make a difference?”

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

Yes, it is hard; we face this. We all stand on doorsteps, and people say it is not going to count. It is hard to argue with the math, and Mr. Schwartz can complement this. If I am in a riding where all the evidence shows me that my vote actually will not count, that there is virtually no chance, it is a totally irrational action at that point.

I don't know if Mr. Gibson wants to comment.

[Darren Gibson]

That is where we get into the problem of the strategic vote. Nobody likes to talk about strategic voting, but when you are in a riding where your vote simply doesn't count but you want it to go to the next candidate or party that shares most closely your values, that is the trouble you are in. That is what I hear a lot at the door. I don't think we are talking provincial here, but I worked on provincial and federal, and it is the same response no matter which election it is: “I wish I could vote for this party, but I know they don't have a chance of winning, so I guess I'll try for my second choice, or not go out at all.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We will go to Mr. Ste-Marie.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Good afternoon, madam. Good afternoon, gentlemen.

If I have enough time I will ask each speaker a question, starting with Ms. Smoke.

In the north of my constituency of Joliette lies the Atikamekw community of Manawan, the Atikamekw First Nation. I am particularly concerned with First Nation issues.

In your comments, you mentioned obstacles to voting in Aboriginal communities: language, travel, identification. Then, in your discussion with Mr. Cullen, you said that the vote doesn't count anyway.

How would you suggest we fix that? Is it about language services, the ability of First Nations people to get to the polling stations, or relaxing the criteria for identification? Then, if there were a proportional voting system, could one or more seats per province be set aside for Aboriginal communities?

[Gina Smoke]

When it was made more complicated in this last round of elections, with the different identification you had to have to prove who you were, it kind of fed into that not caring about our vote. How do you make it better? I guess setting up systems with better places where they can go to vote and having somebody who is able to interpret for some of the people. How many politicians go up to these areas and talk to the communities? They will go to the ones that are more convenient.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

On that subject, in a proportional system, is there a need to reserve seats in each province for First Nations, so that they are well represented?

[Gina Smoke]

I do think it is a good idea, but you also have to keep in mind that it gets complicated again because of our different nationalities. I am Dakota. There are Cree, Ojibwa, and so on. Then you have to figure out how to make that work.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

So, in a province, First Nations in the broad sense do not share enough values to be represented by one elected member. Is that what you are saying?

[Gina Smoke]

I think that's a good start. I really do. I think that would show that their voices do matter.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you.

I see that time is flying and I want to talk to the other two witnesses.

My next question goes to you, Mr. Gibson.

You said that for Unifor, your union, reforming the voting system by moving to proportional voting is important. This committee is all about reforming the voting system. Its time has come. At the same time, you said that you do not have a concrete model to propose to us. You pointed out that the government, the prime minister, announced that it was the last time that Canadians would be voting under the current system.

Time is an issue, if we want to change the voting system. The Chief Electoral Officer has said that everything has to be voted on and passed by next spring, by May or June 2017, if he is to be able to put the new system in place for the next election.

In your opinion, are those time lines realistic?

[Darren Gibson]

My opinion is, no, that's not a realistic deadline. June of next year is not realistic. It could be realistic for the community to come up with a proposed model, but I don't think that in two years it's realistic to implement it. I hope that it is, because it's a long time coming, but I don't think that it is implementable.

The biggest problem is going to be educating not only our members, but our community and electorate as a whole. To come up with a model, to be able to explain it, and then try it out to make sure it's going to work in a two-year period is going to be quite a task. I'm confident this committee has that capability. It's hard to say. We'll see.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you for your confidence. We will see whether we are able to live up to it.

To wrap up, I have a question for Mr. Schwartz.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Please be brief, Mr. Ste-Marie.