Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2016

[Stephen Thompson]

I want to put a nuance around that.

You asked a question about the general public. We're not here representing the general public. We're here representing an official language community, and the notion here of the government's duty to consult with official language communities on matters that affect the linguistic rights of Canadians.

We suspect, we don't know yet, but we're waiting for a legal impact study that's being conducted right now by Maître Mark Powers. When that legal impact study comes out, we will have a more complete understanding on what electoral reform might mean on the linguistic rights of Canadians. If that's triggered, then official language communities would expect to be consulted on a specific model.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you.

Is that right, Ms. Loutfi?

[Carolyn Loutfi]

Yes.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

You spoke about young people. Several groups came to meet with us, such as Samara and the Institut du Nouveau Monde. What emerged from their presentations was that the voting system is not necessarily a topic that will generate greater interest in politics among young people. We heard many of them say that they felt their vote did not count, but other elements emerged when they were questioned and consulted.

I would like you to confirm or correct what I am saying. When young people were questioned, they expressed a lack of interest in politics. They said they were too busy, that it was difficult to get on the electors' list, and mentioned many other obstacles. Experts told us that when important issues were at stake, young people felt involved, and if we expressed an interest in their opinion, they were motivated to go and vote. We might see a repeat of what happened during the last election.

In your opinion—I believe you said this, but I'd like to be sure—if the only thing we do is change the voting system, will this affect young people's level of interest in voting?

[Carolyn Loutfi]

Would simply changing the voting system accomplish this? No. I don't believe that would be enough, but we have the opportunity at this time to use the current debate to generate interest in young people who don't participate in the current system. In fact, they are the ones who should be involved in that conversation. However, I don't think they are in the room.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

If you had one recommendation to make today, in light if the discussions you have had with young people, what would it be?

What you've just said regarding the fact that young people are not in the room, and that we've not gone out to meet with them either, is quite true. It would probably be our responsibility to go to high schools and colleges and have this same discussion.

If you had one recommendation to submit today, aside from changing the voting system, regarding something that could be done to generate interest in politics among young people, what would it be?

[Carolyn Loutfi]

In fact, you have to go and meet with them with some educational resources. You have to go where they are.

We can't wait for them to come to us because they're not coming. We're doing this work, and it's really hard to reach the youth demographic. We need to find them. We need to bring them this information, and we're not doing it effectively as a country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Boulerice.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you Mr. Chair.

Good morning, and welcome to Montreal. We are not in my riding, but it is quite close to here.

I thank the people who are in the room for their interest.

Madam Director and Mr. Director, we welcome you as witnesses.

Ms. Loutfi, I do everything I can to engage young people. I tweeted out a message before coming here. I took a photo of the downtown area and put it on Instagram, and said that we would be talking about electoral reform. This didn't mobilize crowds, but... We try to use the tools at our disposal.

The committee was created by the Liberal government in order to see what changes need to be made to the voting system. We were promised that 2015 would be the last federal election to be held using the first-past-the-post system -- I prefer the English expression, it's easier to say. We are studying at what is done elsewhere. We know that between 80% and 85% of OECD countries have adopted some type of proportional voting system. This works well in most of the countries where governments are stable, and it promotes good public policy. There are more coalitions than we have here, and it changes the political culture since the parties have to work together and talk.

One of the objectives in the committee's mandate is to lessen the distortions created by the first-past-the-post system. In the last election in 2015 and in the 2011, one political party obtained 39% of the votes and about 55% to 60% of members. With our system, that means 100% of the power. This means that for the next four years, a party can win all of the votes in the House and pass all of its bills.

I know that you're not advocating one voting system in particular. Your organization, Apathy is Boring, has such an interesting name. Do you subscribe to the objective that a voting system should reduce the distortions between the popular will and the number of seats one party can obtain in Parliament, whatever Parliament that might be?

[Carolyn Loutfi]

As an organization, we don't have a stance on that. It's not an objective that we're specifically pushing for. If you want to know if that's an objective among a diverse population of youth, you need to go and ask them. I don't think we are asking them right now.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

I hope that they will go and vote anyway, whatever the voting system.

One of the problems with the current voting system is the fact that a member can be elected with very few votes in a riding. Some people are elected with 30% of the votes where 70% of electors in a riding voted. Their vote is counted, but not taken into account. They will not be represented in Parliament by a member who shares their values and their ideology.

In the previous election, there were 9 million votes that did not elect any members of Parliament. So when people say that they will not be voting because they feel that their vote does not count, they may be right. Under our voting system, every vote that is put into the box will not necessarily translate into representation in Parliament. However, in the case of more proportional voting systems, like those that are used in many countries, if a party obtains 15% of the votes, it obtains around 15% of the seats. The NDP supports that system.

Mr. Thompson and Mr. Dobie, you spoke of the importance of local representation. There are proportional voting systems with dual votes: the local vote and a vote using a list of members, such as in Germany, for example. There are also proportional voting systems such as in Ireland, for instance, where ridings are somewhat bigger and where three to five members can represent the same geographic area. This means that all of the MPs have a local link to their citizens. For instance, there could be two members from a certain party and a third one from another, which allows electors to speak to the member who belongs to their party, the one they feel most comfortable with.

Could the Irish system, with larger ridings and several MPs, satisfy your wish to maintain a link between the local MP and the elector?

[Stephen Thompson]

Without commenting on a specific system, our position is fairly clear. We're calling for a direct link between the electorate, a geographically defined constituency, and the representative in the House.

We will see what is contained in the legal impact study from Maître Power when it comes out. We suspect that there are going to be concerns raised around systems that don't have that link. We suspect that we are going to have concerns around systems that have a list aspect to them, because in effect, this gives more power to parties.

In the last House there was a private member's bill from Mr. Chong that tried to limit the power of the executive and give more power to individual members of Parliament. It was passed in a revised form.

There have been attempts by the House in the past to limit the power of the executive and bring internal reform from within the House to limit the power of the parties. We suspect that might be where the answer lies, but at the end of the day, when we see the legal impact study, I think we're going to be shying away from systems that give more power to political parties.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Ste-Marie now has the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome back, dear colleagues. I want to point out that Mr. Rayes and Ms. Sansoucy are back with us, after having been replaced by other members of the committee previously. I also welcome Mr. Rayes and Mr. Richards' colleagues—I don't see the other name. Good afternoon, gentlemen.

I thank the members of the public who have come here to see us and I thank them for listening. I want to commend the fabulous work of the entire support team that accompanies us week after week. It is a real pleasure to work with you on a daily basis.

I thank you for your presentations. They were very interesting. What I particularly retained from them is the need for education. We have to educate the population to participate and be engaged in politics. We have to develop the civic sense once again. If we neglect that too much there could be catastrophes like the ones that are occurring currently in the elections in our neighbour to the south. It could be dangerous.

Mr. Thompson and Mr. Dobie, I have a question concerning electoral reform. A few years ago, the Quebec National Assembly conducted consultations with an eye to electoral reform. At that time, did your organization have a position on either the status quo or any type of reform in particular?

[Kevin Dobie]

No.

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

So, you did not take a position.

[Stephen Thompson]

We weren't involved in those consultations.

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

Fine.

Gentlemen, lady, according to your presentations, the status quo suits you well. It would be just as well if the system were not changed, and that would present fewer risks than a reform that would bring in an unknown system.

Are those indeed your thoughts?

[Kevin Dobie]

As far as the system is concerned, the status quo is not ideal.

There are a lot of corrections to be made, specifically to get more people involved and engaged. We're not ready to say that the current

the first-past-the-post system—I have forgotten the French term.

I've never heard it said before, to be honest. I've only heard first past the post.

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

It's the scrutin majoritaire uninominal à un tour.

[Kevin Dobie]

We're not ready to say that the status quo, in terms of the system, is a yea or a nay, but we definitely have a bit of a challenge—I think all of us do—with engagement, education, and civic involvement.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Loutfi, what do you think?

[Carolyn Loutfi]

I would make the same comment. There is a big problem right now because a lot of young people are disaffected. That is part of our mission and it is a problem we have to deal with.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Dobie, in your presentation you said that the five possible electoral systems presented in our document could create confusion.

According to your group, in order to protect the rights of linguistic minorities, both the anglophone minorities in Quebec and the francophone minorities in the rest of Canada, should we avoid some models, or are there some models that could have an adverse effect on minorities?

[Kevin Dobie]

We are not there yet. Certainly, any system that would give more power to political parties would worry us. We feel the same about any system that would reduce the geographical influence, for instance a pure proportional representation system like the Israeli model. That concerns us.