Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

I now invite Laurie Neale to step up to microphone No. 1.

Ms. Boulianne, you now have the floor.

[Sylvie Boulianne, As an Individual]

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you this evening.

First, I would like to emphasize one point. Canada is a very old democracy on this planet. It dates back to 1867. Italy's dates back to 1870. I wanted to mention that simply to put things in perspective. In fact, what was a good electoral system 150 years ago is no longer fair today.

I have major reservations about what I hear when people say there might be a referendum on this change. I think it is essential that the government shoulder its responsibilities and change a system that is now unfair and no longer represents the mind, collective unconscious, or will of every Canadian citizen. It is absolutely essential to make this change.

I am not familiar with all the proportionality-based systems because they are extremely complex. I therefore trust you to select the best system. However, I think it would be unacceptable to maintain the status quo following the work this committee has undertaken.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, madam.

I invite Anne-Marie Bouchard to step up to microphone No. 2.

Go ahead, Ms. Neale.

[Laurie Neale, As an Individual]

I want to thank you for the opportunity to come here and speak. I'd like to congratulate the committee for actually going around and listening to citizens. I think that's very, very important.

I'm coming here as a Canadian who returned to Canada in the last couple of years after living for 27 years in the Netherlands, where they have an open list proportional representation system of government. With coalition governments, they do last longer than in Italy, although sometimes they are very short. It's a system that has its pluses and minuses. Some of the problems include one-issue parties, but they tend to be short-lived, maybe one term in Parliament.

One of the problems with a system like that is there is a disengagement between the citizens and the members of Parliament. They don't know who the members are. They know their cabinet members, but generally people don't know the members of Parliament. In a country like the Netherlands, which is maybe two-thirds the size of Nova Scotia, that can work, but in a country as vast as Canada, it can't. I would be very much in favour of something like the mixed member proportional representation.

Europe, of course, is based on proportional representation, where the small countries are represented and have a say in what is happening Europe-wide. It's not for nothing that the European Union was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize a number of years ago. The whole thing is a project to encourage people to feel represented and therefore engaged in what is happening, despite quite a large feeling of disengagement in the political system.

I'd also like to say that I would be against a referendum. Referendums are known for answering questions, but the trouble is that it's not usually the question that's being asked. They are hijacked by either national issues or fringe issues. It would be very much a shame if that were done.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

I invite Jean-Sébastien Dufresne to step up to microphone No. 1.

Ms. Bouchard, you now have the floor.

[Anne-Marie Bouchard, As an Individual]

Ladies and gentlemen, representatives of the population, fellow citizens, I want to share my very humble personal experience with you.

I still feel I belong to the age group that is referred to as young people. When people talk about young people, they often label them as cynical or uninterested in politics, which is absolutely not true in my case.

Personally, I have joined an organization that is fighting for electoral reform, more specifically for a proportional voting system, or at least a proportional representation or a mixed-member proportional system. Before engaging in this cause, I was interested in politics, but I was somewhat depressed and frustrated by what I heard. My engagement in the cause has renewed my interest in politics and my hope that, as a citizen, I can help change things.

I also thought electoral reform could help change the way some of my fellow citizens view politics. I do not think I am the only person who believes proportional voting might result in more coalitions and teamwork. A government's ability to work as part of a team is a good quality.

We have witnessed teamwork here in Quebec with the end-of-life care bill, a currently delicate subject with the federal government, but let us not dwell on that. The experience was positive for the people who worked together on that bill. I imagine you also work as a team on a number of issues. The people take a positive view of teamwork.

I want to comment briefly on the right to vote at the age of 16. Once again, I recently did not have an opinion on the subject, but I developed one as the consultations advanced. I work in education and was fortunate to be born into a family that introduced me to the way things work in politics. Not all children have that chance.

I have not read any studies on the subject, but my impression is that the earlier young people get used to voting and the more educated they are, the earlier in their lives they will start voting. The more informed young people are about the question, the better. Young people can choose their occupational path starting at the age of 15 or 16, and if they are not introduced to politics at that age, there is at great risk they will not become engaged citizens.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have heard that view quite regularly across the country. Thank you, Ms. Bouchard.

Maksym Kovalenkov, would you please step up to microphone No. 2?

Mr. Dufresne, it is your turn.

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne, As an Individual]

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

You previously heard from me in Ottawa a few weeks ago, when I spoke as president of Mouvement Démocratie Nouvelle.

This evening, I am wearing my citizen's hat. I am also an individual, a private individual, a citizen who has his own opinion.

First, let me tell you I enormously admire the work you are doing. I have been following your proceedings and may be one of your greatest admirers. There are probably not a lot of people in the general population who follow your proceedings with as much regularity. It is impressive to see all the energy and time you are devoting to the cause.

Over the past week, I have attended several citizens assemblies organized by MPs and the riding associations of various parties, including Liberal associations in districts that are not necessarily Liberal, as well as Bloc Québecois associations. This really gives me hope. I see these assemblies are fanning the flame of citizen engagement in many people and making us want to take part in this debate.

In those assemblies, I heard people who recommended that we take the time to debate the question and consider the interests of the population as a whole, not those of a party. That is the message I want to deliver to you this evening.

I would not want to summarize the issue very quickly, but, when you analyze everything that has been said, you clearly understand that some voters are concerned about the connection with their local representative and that a system of lists does not address that concern. Others lament the fact that the present system creates false majorities and therefore think we must put an end to the status quo. We also hear people calling for regional representation. All these concerns vastly limit the options, having regard to all possibilities.

Let us quickly consider the results of the consultations and presentations made to the committee.Three-quarters of the experts were in favour of a proportional representation system. Two-thirds of that number supported a compensatory mixed-member proportional system. Twice as many citizens spoke out saying that a referendum was unnecessary. That alone provides a clear picture.

Earlier one witness asked whether it was possible to produce a consensus report. I think that is really the message. People are asking you, please, to do that. I know it is somewhat naive on my part, even though I am very much involved in this issue, but here we have an opportunity to transcend partisan lines, to think in the interests of Canadians as a whole, and genuinely to restore confidence and hope to the entire population. You have that power and we expect you to make the right decisions in everyone's interest.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, sir.

We have come to our final speaker.

Mr. Kovalenkov, you have the floor.

[Maksym Kovalenkov, As an Individual]

I guess I'm one of those who believes this system doesn't work.

I'm an immigrant. I came here when I was 15. My parents brought me. I didn't get my citizenship until maybe three years ago, after three years of waiting. It took a while—great—and I voted in the last election.

When I looked into it before voting, it turned out that my vote was going to be lost. I'm one of those people who was disappointed and doesn't believe it works, but I'm here today and I'm really happy to see you listen to us and to be among those who actually care in one way or another. It's great. This sort of process gives me hope.

I'm just putting my two cents into the box for the proportional system, and with no referendum, because that will suffer from drawbacks very similar to the drawbacks that the elections suffer from today.

Thanks for doing a great job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thanks for ending this day on such a positive and encouraging note. That's wonderful. Thank you for your thoughts.

Before I close the meeting, I want to remind everyone again that on October 20 at 7:30 at the McGill University New Residence Hall, which is located at 3625 Park Avenue, the Centre for the Study of Democratic Citizenship will be organizing a public forum on the Canadian electoral system.

Thank you, everyone.

Tomorrow we leave for Halifax to begin a tour of the Atlantic provinces.

As you know, the committee must table its report in the House of Commons on December 1^st.

Thanks to the MPs, thanks to the members, thanks to the public.

Till next time.