Electoral Reform Committee on Sept. 28th, 2016

[Barbara Simons]

I think there are acceptable uses for online voting for elections that don't matter much. For example, for prom queen, I don't care. I think it depends on how important you think the election is and how much of a risk you want to take. Obviously, fewer people voting over the Internet means the risk will be smaller. If the election doesn't matter, then who cares if it is risky or not?

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

In your opinion, there's no acceptable way to do it, if you place value on the outcome of an election, which we most certainly do at this committee.

[Barbara Simons]

How much risk do you want to take?

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

I'll ask Dr. de Rooij a final question. We've had quite a bit of back and forth on what preferential voting does to the possibility of what many would see as odious parties of extreme belief.

Can we safely make the point that in examining proportional representation it's unreasonable to do so under the lens of the current party structure, and that once you enter into proportionality you have created different avenues for parties, and that the electoral landscape would look radically different with the greater possibility of small parties or parties of extreme belief?

[Eline de Rooij]

You would expect that over time—and this might not happen noticeably in the first election—the types of parties might change somewhat. You'll see new parties entering the system and different issues coming up.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

So the consequences of going to a proportional system are really unforeseeable.

[Eline de Rooij]

You'll see more parties, but that's the whole point of more proportional systems. I'm pretty sure about that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Mr. DeCourcey.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

My thanks to our three presenters and everyone here this evening.

Professor de Rooij, I wanted to pick up on the conversation you were having with my colleague, Monsieur Boulerice, about the notion of more representative legislatures serving as a proxy for voters' true desire for more representative public policy and how that might not necessarily be achieved. I know my colleague and a lot of us could conceive of a smaller party holding a minority government to account and demanding certain things they felt were more representative of public policy.

Your contention that this might not always be the case could lead me to believe that a smaller party could, for example, pull the plug on the government at a time when it had reached a historic agreement with first nations, or early learning child care agreements with the provinces, or when we're about to host an international conference on climate change.

Are these the sorts of trade-offs that we need to consider in different electoral systems?

[Eline de Rooij]

We do know that on average the duration of government is shorter under more proportional systems, which seems to suggest that they are more likely to have, at some point, somebody pulling the plug.

In respect of policy outcomes, however, it might not necessarily be that different from what we see now. I want to emphasize that there's little evidence that small parties carry more weight in policy decisions within the government. There is, as far as I know, little empirical evidence for that.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

You've done a lot of work studying the political behaviour of newcomers, immigrants. Can you talk to us about how newcomers to Canada experience and participate in the present electoral system, and what we should be mindful of when we're considering different electoral systems, and how newcomers might interact with a different system?

[Eline de Rooij]

One thing I know is that immigrants adapt pretty quickly to new situations, including electoral situations. That's a positive. As to party choice, what we know about people choosing parties is that it's social. It's what your surroundings choose, the information you provide. Party mobilization is a very important aspect, and I think that is more important than the electoral system.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

That's perfect. Thanks very much.

Mr. Lang, on your idea of social experimentation and pilot projects, is the thought of experimenting with an electoral system in a localized area something that you've talked about or considered?

[Harley Lang]

Yes, it's something I considered. I think there are tactics out there that we can explore to increase voter turnout. One would be systematic prompting. For example, Stats Canada recently reported one of the highest response rates to its latest census. That might be in part due to the mandatory nature of completing the census. However, I know for a fact that I received knocks on my door to complete the census, and there were forms left at my door and the doors of other neighbours in my condominium. I think we could explore that route, how we can prompt individuals to come out to vote.

I echo many citizens who have talked to you, both here earlier tonight and at the town hall earlier this month, who have suggested exploring avenues to reinforce citizen behaviours for coming out to vote. What incentive can we establish that will bring voters out? Is it a tax rebate? Is it something else? I'm not sure, but I think it's something we have to look into.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

What about the idea of trying to demonstrate, or pilot, a different electoral system in a part of the country as a way to demonstrate it more broadly? I'm even thinking of the localized way of demonstrating a different urban-rural system for the country, as has been proposed to us many times throughout our deliberations.

[Harley Lang]

Yes, I think that's totally something we can look at on a local government level.

Again, we have to think about what we are evaluating. Are we looking at the stats of this political system on voter turnout, that is, the number of citizens who actually come out to vote, or are we looking at the representation of the different thoughts of the individuals in the House, or wherever it may be that they're represented?

I think we need to figure out what it is we're measuring and from there we can find other avenues to explore further.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Wonderful. Thanks so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you to our witnesses. That was really interesting. It got people thinking, for sure.

We're going to take a two-minute break, and then we're going to come back to our public input session.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We're at the part of the meeting that many of you have been looking forward to, the open-mike session. I really need your help in this part of the meeting because we need to make sure that everyone who's on this list gets a chance to express themselves, and that can only happen if we keep to the two-minute limit per person. We've been able to achieve this everywhere across the country, and I'd say Vancouver is no different. So please don't be offended if I have to invoke the time limit at some point.

We'll start with Ariane Eckardt and Siegfried Eckardt at mikes one and two, please.

Ms. Eckardt, go ahead for two minutes.

[Ariane Eckardt, As an Individual]

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen and thank you all for coming out.

I'm very happy that we've already dealt with online voting.

My next point is that if the system isn't broken, don't fix it; maybe improve it.

As far as lowering the voting age is concerned, that was raised here earlier. We had another session where an ex-MP came up and said, “My teenagers have asked me to say not to foist this additional burden onto them at this stage, when they have enough to worry about with their studies and they do not need to be burdened with also having to find out who to vote for and when to vote.”

The other thing I'd like to bring up is about the radical parties that are springing up. For instance, in Germany, Ms. Merkel, I think, is letting the German people down, which resulted in the radical party that sprang up, the anti-immigration party. If our leaders listen to us and do the right thing by us and our country, there is less chance of those radical parties springing up.

One situation we should consider also is that we have currently a lot of foreign money pouring into our country at election time and also other times. I would urge you to find a way of curtailing that. Israel has the same problem.

I am for a referendum.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Siegfried Eckardt, go ahead, please.

[Siegfried Eckardt, As an Individual]

I'm Ziggy Eckardt, and I am the husband. I'm going to try to make it fairly short.

There is only one thing I wanted to bring up, but in the meantime things have happened as I have been listening this afternoon. With all the different reasons and the different options we have for change, something hasn't been mentioned. I personally would like to see voters who are a bit better informed when they go into the voting booth.

The other thing is I am very much in favour of what has been said this afternoon by our statistician, and I would like to remind the panel that 68% of all Canadians would actually like to see us all vote on whatever we do.

Besides that, I have a little something here from Germany, and I've shown it to about 700 people already and there hasn't been a single one who has been in favour of adopting something like what I have here. With your permission I would like to unfold this ballot from Germany.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I bet it's a ballot. It's very long. Go ahead. Unfold it, absolutely.

Wow.

[Siegfried Eckardt]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll hear from Ms. Angela Smailes now for two minutes.