Evidence of meeting #34 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 north.
8:10 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
Frankly, in the current system, I don't think it's that much.... It's pretty ingrained. It has existed for a while, and people are pretty used to it. As you move on to the more complex systems, that certainly is going to be much more of an issue.
8:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
If you have a very brief point that you would like to make, go ahead.
8:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
I'll just make a short comment. In my experience with my nomination, we had ranked ballots, and there were a lot of spoiled ballots, because some of the people were doing it for the first time. They were going in and memorizing that I was third on the ballot. It's a true story; I am not trying to make fun. In the end, I heard from the chief scrutineer that there were a lot of ballots that just had the number three beside my name, and that was it. There was confusion created by some people about how they were supposed to go about it. I'm sure we can overcome it, just as you said, through education and putting things in practice a few times.
8:15 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you for coming in and speaking. I appreciate the input you are providing. What I am hearing is that there have to be some changes to the way we vote and the way we elect MPs in northern Canada, be it the Northwest Territories, the other territories, or the mid-north of the provinces.
In terms of the translation the member was talking about, my concern is that, under the Fair Elections Act.... It was my experience in the last election that we couldn't even provide.... The people working there, at the polling station under the Fair Elections Act, didn't even allow elders to bring in someone to translate for them. There were people who were turned away in my riding because of that. Did you hear any similar comments about that?
8:15 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
Yes. It's more anecdotal than anything, but the Fair Elections Act caused a number of issues around that sort of thing, with the ID. Some communities have no way of getting ID. It takes them six to eight weeks to get a photo ID, or they have to fly south. There are quite a few issues, more around the ID and the accessibility of it, but I also heard some stories of exactly that problem.
8:15 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
I really appreciate your presenting again an alternative system to what we have. Change could be good. Change can work out for the best, or sometimes it doesn't, but taking the steps forward to make that occur.... It seems to me, from what we've heard thus far today, this is what the northern territories are looking for, some kind of change.
8:15 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
I won't presume to speak on behalf of the entire territory, but I think some movement in some way would be desired by a lot of people in Canada. I think most people just want government to work, and most people want to be able to cast a vote and then to get good government out of it.
8:15 p.m.
President, Northern Territories Federation of Labour
I'd have to agree. I can't speak for everybody who lives in the north. I can speak for myself and for the people that I know where they stand on the issue.
In life there's the old saying that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But when there's conflict, conflict evokes change, and you can't have change without conflict. That's exactly what we have in this current electoral system. There is conflict. There are people who are unhappy. Canadians are tired of it. Northerners want the Government of Canada to work for them.
They want to be represented by their MP, and I believe there are MPs who do a very good job in trying to represent the territories, as difficult as their jobs are in being such a small voice, but having such a huge jurisdiction.
8:15 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Could I have one last comment, please?
Canadians say—and I've heard this today, and yesterday, and I hear it in Ottawa—that as a member of Parliament I am there to represent Canadians. What I'm thinking in the back of my mind is that I come from the north of the province of Saskatchewan, and that the further north you go, the representation and the lens through which you look changes. Canadians who live in the north have different versions about being Canadian, democracy, participation, and the importance of feeling whether their voices count. The candidates they're going to support may not belong to a certain party, but they're going to support that person.
Is that your similar experience with the north here in Canada?
8:15 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
I'd say so. It's interesting that in territorial politics the lowest turnout rate for voting is in Yellowknife. The high turnout is in all the communities. Getting out of Yellowknife into small communities is where there are extremely high turnouts, and Yellowknife is rock bottom. Some ridings were 24% and in the communities you got into 90%. It's an interesting balance, but I think there's a stronger personal connection.
8:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
Thank you to our panellists and our audience members.
Mr. Lambrecht, you delivered some strongly worded remarks or had some definite passion behind the idea that politics in Canada was toxic, filled with anger and rancour. Do you feel the same way having participated in a panel among 12 members of Parliament who are earnestly working together, had a nice civil dinner together before we came back to convene this panel, and are travelling and getting along quite nicely? Is this a surprise or does it seem unlikely? Does this experience change your assumption that politics is all about anger and attack?
8:20 p.m.
President, Northern Territories Federation of Labour
I wouldn't say I had assumptions about politics being about anger and attack. I think that before an election and after an election are two completely different periods, and when somebody is trying to get elected, the atmosphere and the environment is different from after they've been elected.
Once you're elected as an MP, you put on your best face and you work with the people who are also elected in order to do your job, or else the voters will tell you where to go the next time your name is on the ballot. It's not simply about politics and me thinking that it is generally toxic. It's all about the way people get elected. It's the negative perceptions of the campaigns that I believe leave a bad taste in people's mouths.
I believe that most people are good. It's simply that people get sick and tired of always hearing the same toxic stuff about politics, and the media is to blame for that, I feel.
8:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
Your final point about the media is interesting. I was going to suggest that different campaigns are run differently on the ground. This is Canada, and I didn't feel there would be any advantage in attacking my opponents and I didn't do it. I saw no reason to from the point of view of being a generally civil and polite person and also as a matter of the type of campaign I would want to run. I think most people at the local level are similar. I guess there are some who get into nasty dogfights but I don't think that's typical at the riding level. I'm not certain that this is an electoral system issue. In terms of your comment about the media, perhaps it's a matter of the lens through which people see their politics, but I don't know if that's an election system issue.
If I may move on, there are a couple of other things I want to ask about.
I had the courage a minute ago to pronounce “Wasylciw” and I practised it in my head, but no, I got it wrong. Sorry, David, I'll just continue then.
As a committee we've spent a lot of our time on electoral systems. There are other areas that are part of the committee's mandate. Both of you touched on some of the other non-electoral system issues such as online voting and mandatory voting. Neither of you are in favour of mandatory voting, if I recall. With the online piece we've had expert discussions regarding the implications of nothing being hack-proof.
I'll let either of you quickly weigh in on either of those issues.
8:20 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
I'm not dead set against mandatory voting. On its own it's not great, but if you do a whole bunch of other things such as having a “none of the above”, having a number of other avenues, perhaps there's some merit to it. Again, I don't know if it actually solves the problem of the turnout number. It gets the turnout number quite high but not perhaps actual voter engagement. Online voting, certainly if it's a problem what is it solving?
8:25 p.m.
President, Northern Territories Federation of Labour
As far as mandatory voting is concerned, how do you sell that to people? Are you going to put out advertisements and say that if people don't vote, these are the consequences? You're basically putting an even worse taste in people's mouths. You get them to associate punishment with voting. It just doesn't work for me. It's on a rights and freedoms basis.
As far as technology is concerned, you're absolutely right. There is no computer-based technology that is going to be 100% hack-proof. We can sure damn well try, but ultimately it's the people who design it. If there's an ulterior motive behind the people.... Put it this way: computers are logical and they're only as logical as the people who design them and use them. If a computer breaks, it has nothing to do with the way they're using it. It's simply something illogical has happened, period.
8:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
I have a quick point, if I may.
We have had many people talking about some of the reasons why people don't vote. This is a specific one that I don't think either of you raised but we've heard it from the open-mike sessions and from other people.
It's a perception that only one vote isn't going to make a difference, and their vote isn't going to turn anything. One of you, I believe, mentioned something about close elections not being the norm. I might point out that there were four seats in this current Parliament that were decided by less than 100 votes. One of our members here at the table is one of them. When you have, maybe 75,000 eligible voters, and depending on your turnout, maybe 40,000 or 50,000 people and it comes down to a result of, the closest one was 61 votes, I think that maybe Canadians ought to be aware that every vote is important. Every vote counts no matter what system you use. Indeed, I think no one would want to stay home because they thought their vote didn't count and find out that an election really turned on a very small handful of votes. It happens in every election.
8:25 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Thanks for the insights you've brought tonight in both of your testimonies.
I had the opportunity in the mid-1980s to the early 1990s to live in Fort Smith. It was where I started my career. One of the best pieces of advice I ever received was from an elder in Fort Smith. His advice was that sometimes you need to listen. It's a lesson I've carried with me throughout my life. In that spirit, I'm going to give you the opportunity to speak, and we're going to listen for this last five minutes before we go to the public session.
The Northwest Territories is a very special place, and I'd like you to share with us a sort of parting wisdom. I do a lot of exploring of values related to our electoral system, so I'm going to turn it over to the two of you. Could you share with us, as we get ready to leave this amazing place early tomorrow morning, things that you'd like us to consider as we go back to deliberate a new electoral system that would reflect things that are important to you as northerners, to your community?
I'll stop talking and listen.
8:25 p.m.
President, Northern Territories Federation of Labour
Simply put, listen to the people. Respect that some people in the north have lived here for their entire lives. I love the reality shows, and a good example is Survivor. That's great. Throw a couple of people out in some tropical place and watch them survive.
If you want to have a real survivor, throw them somewhere up in Nunavut and see how they survive. You could take me into the middle of the Northwest Territories, and based on the knowledge I have gained through northern schooling, having aboriginal friends, and going to aboriginal camps when I was younger, I could do quite well in the NWT out on the land. Nunavut is a completely different story. The way that you survive up there is entirely different.
Sit and listen to the people without any bias, without any judgment, without any assumptions. Chuck everything out the door and simply listen to what they have to say. Connect with them on the deepest level that you possibly can, and recognize that they live in the north because they love the north, as desolate and isolated as it is.
If we're going to be represented by democracy, we want the same voice as the rest of Canada. Although we may have one MP and it seems like we have a big voice, we really don't. We get drowned out by the other provinces. You talk about having 40,000 in the NWT with one MP, and then you have a larger jurisdiction—not any specific one—with maybe 100,000 people with one MP. Does that mean that the NWT, Nunavut, and Yukon should have 0.3% of an MP because we only have 50% of the population of a larger jurisdiction that has the right to one MP?
If we had 100,000 people who lived in each territory, it wouldn't be an issue to have more than one MP. The simple matter is, why don't people want to live in the north? There are tons of opportunities up here, but it takes a special kind of person to want to live up here and contribute to the communities of the north. With the communities that we all live in, whether it be Yellowknife or Behchoko or Inuvik, or any of the other communities in the Northwest Territories, every person has a reason that they live in that community. When you go up to Nunavut and you go to Iqaluit, you will see a diverse population.
For me, when I see people I know are not from Canada, that doesn't make them any less of a human or Canadian than I am. It just makes me wonder why. What was it about this far north, Iqaluit, that they came all the way from the Dominican Republic or from Jamaica? Why would you go from such a beautiful warm place to such a dry, cold, desolate place? It's because there are opportunities. The communities, the environment, the cultures there are unlike any place you will ever visit elsewhere in Canada.
8:30 p.m.
Chair, OpenNWT
In short summary, the north is special, both as a place and constitutionally. We're a bit more unique than a lot of places. Well, we're not more unique. We're all very special. It is important that the north be represented. Even just one MP doesn't speak to the importance within Canada, and the importance, frankly, of the money that gets spent up here. The north couldn't be built on one MP in Ottawa. It takes a whole bunch of people from a whole bunch of parties to actually help build the north, from a federal perspective.
Any system change needs to be fair and reasonable and lead to balanced elections. Any system change also can't be seen as benefiting just one party. The biggest fear is that a system of change would come in that would be a benefit to one party. We'll go through the next election cycle with another party saying we'll change, and get into an electoral sort of battle over elections. It needs to be seen that it's going to be fair for Canadians and not necessarily fair to the particular parties, but it has to be something that's fair to the people. As was said, it's about listening. Any changes need to be made in a way that show that our government is listening to people in Canada and representing them reasonably.