Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 5th, 2016

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you.

I just have the one question for now. I know we're getting nearer to the time that we should be doing the public portion, and I know that's the part we're all looking forward to the most.

I'll turn to you, Ms. Reid, although it seems that you're still grappling a little with potentially changing your thoughts on it. You mentioned in your brief, and I'll quote from there because I thought it was a good quote, “I believe that something as important as electoral reform ultimately has to be taken to the people and I support holding a referendum on whether to retain our First-Past-the-Post...system or introduce Proportional Representation.”

I bring it up not, as most of my colleagues would assume, to talk about referendums. That's what I talk about quite often because I think it's an important issue. I actually agree very specifically with that point you made there. However, it's more to talk about what we're not hearing about, and that is the idea of a ranked ballot. When we've had these open-mike sessions, there are many supporters of mixed-member proportional, and others who are supporters of some other type of PR system. First past the post seems to be the other system that comes up as something that people want to retain.

I know when I surveyed my constituents, it was overwhelming how many hoped to retain the first-past-the-post system. The one thing we're not hearing from very many people is the idea of a ranked ballot. In your brief, you mentioned that it's something that shouldn't be included as one of the options, and you've given your reasons today for why that is.

I guess the point I'm making is that we have this choice to make as to whether we would retain the system we have or go to some other type of proportional representation. Those seem to be the options.

In order to make a change to a proportional system, there's likely a lot of change required. We've heard from the electoral officer that he would need a significant amount of lead time. We're getting close to where we're running out of the time to be able to do that. It might leave only something like an alternative vote or a ranked ballot as an option.

The sense I get from you—and I want to verify this—and the sense I think we get from many people, is that rather than rush this you would want see a long lead time for a referendum, the educational component. I think Mr. Dixon would seem to agree with that.

Is it more important that we get this right, or that we rush to meet the timeline that's very quickly approaching?

[Marilyn Reid]

I think it's not just having a two-year lead-in to a referendum; it's government fully being committed. There has to be a big emphasis in the education system. I would see citizens' assemblies taking a big role—very different from the role they took before—in going out to communities and to community groups and talking about all of the options.

With respect to the ranked ballot, I'm not at all opposed to ranked ballots within proportional representation. That's quite different. However, ranked ballot, Australian-style, has a bias. When I raised that issue with them at Nick's and Seamus's session, people were shocked when I gave the CBC report. People who were supporting ranked ballot were shocked.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I appreciate that, but I'm not quite certain I heard the type of response I was looking for there.

I appreciate the information that you gave. That was all helpful. I guess what I'm getting at, and we're quickly coming to the point where this might be the case, is that if the choice is to do it quickly and limit ourselves in terms of what the options might be and what it looks like, is it more important to accomplish this before the 2019 election, or is it more important, if it takes more time, to get it right and make sure we've chosen the right system for Canada?

[Marilyn Reid]

I will answer.

If there's a full commitment from government to do all these things that would engage the public, I'm for holding a referendum. If there's no commitment, and there wasn't the commitment in B.C., and there wasn't a commitment in Ontario, then I am definitely not.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I appreciate that.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Richards.

Mr. DeCourcey.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Reid and Mr. Dixon.

I will point out, on the issue of ranked ballots, that there has been public commentary from proponents of PR—Arend Lijphart, Brian Tanguay, Dennis Pilon, and others—to suggest that we can't presuppose that the results of a previous election campaign can be superimposed onto future results, because everything takes place in the context of a new system, with new issues at play.

I would venture a guess that the Liberal Party would not have been the second choice of a lot of electors in 2011. We need to just always be mindful that we're talking about electoral systems over the long haul here. There's a whole other layer, and layer, and layer, of context that we need to be mindful of when we're thinking of how we want Canadians to engage with the voting system and to engage with their elected officials.

Brendon, I'm interested in chatting with you a little bit more about voter turnout. What was the experience like this past election at Memorial University?

[Brendon Dixon]

That's a really good question.

First off, I just want to say, if I've ruffled any feathers, that I have a lot of respect for everyone around the table. Thank you very much for having me.

With regard to your question, Elections Canada came in and had voting booths on campus, and we saw a huge increase. I would argue that when you look back and break it all down...or actually, I don't need to. There were huge lines waiting for these voting booths. They were all students waiting to cast their votes.

I think the voting booths at the university played a huge part in how our results in St. John's played out. That's what would I say.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

In a period of declining voter turnout, especially amongst young people right across western democracies, who are saying that politics just doesn't matter to them as it doesn't change their day-to-day lives and who are wondering why they should vote if their vote doesn't count, what was the difference in 2015 that led to a striking increase in young voter turnout?

[Brendon Dixon]

I have to be really diplomatic here.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

No, you don't need to be that diplomatic.

[Brendon Dixon]

I think it was the tone of the election. I actually wrote a little piece on this in The Independent. It was more about change, trying to get rid of a government that was around for a long time. I'm not criticizing the government or anything, but when a government is around for a long time, the shelf life expires after a while. People tend to get tired.

I think that's what drove a lot of people out this time around. It was a different kind of election, one where there was a lot of positivity in terms of messaging. I think that played a huge role.

I don't really want to confuse being able to vote with actual engagement. Actual engagement does not just start and end at the polling booth. Engagement is something that is more like a continuous thing, as you probably well know.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

You started down the road of telling your story when my colleague Sherry asked you about how you first became engaged in politics. I mean, we all have our own story. I want to hear yours, if you're willing to share.

[Brendon Dixon]

I started off getting interested in history and then getting involved in my community, working with people who were a bit more impoverished than I was. I volunteered with Junior Achievement. I was always wanting to help people and stuff.

I didn't grow up in a political household. We didn't talk about politics. I was the only one. I was the odd duck in my house. I always had a real passion for it. That's why I said I'm a bit of an odd case. I don't want to reflect it as being a framework to get a citizen engaged in politics.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

All right.

With the time I have left, Ms. Reid, you mentioned the potential for CBC to play a role in engaging Canadians in the democratic process. I've had these conversations with members of this committee. Ms. May and I have talked about the role that CBC can play. I grew up in a household that was always watching or listening to CBC, but millions of Canadians aren't tuned in to CBC and receive media that can accentuate the divisiveness of what may not at times be as divisive a political culture.

How do we manoeuvre given those realities?

[Marilyn Reid]

It would be with great difficulty. I mentioned CBC because we have it still, so because we have it, let's use it. We can't use those other sources, if you like, as easily. It's just overwhelming. I think people are so overwhelmed with what's on the Internet at the moment, there's a difficulty in focusing. We'll put an event online and we'll get all sorts of Facebook likes and people saying they're coming, and maybe 5% will come.

People are so engaged online that they just can't quite get out into the street to do the protest. I don't know how you deal with that. The Internet is something precious that everybody loves, but it's not leading to community.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

That brings us to the end of this segment. I would just like to say that this was very interesting. We had a really focused discussion on youth and engagement. We haven't had it quite like this, done in this way or expressed in this way at our panels.

Ms. Reid, all I can say is that you must have been a really great teacher. Your passion and commitment for education and for making life better for young people continues in the role that you're playing now.

Mr. Dixon, I think you have a good future in politics. You're very eloquent and you're equally passionate. You also know how to deliver things that people may not want to hear in a very nice way, so that nobody takes offence. I think that will take you a long way.

[Brendon Dixon]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you both.

We'll go to our short public input session now.

Thank you very much for being here. I have a list of about seven people. I'll explain to those in the audience how we've been doing this so far. It has worked very well. Intervenors are allotted two minutes to present their points of view. We'll have two people at the mikes at any given time. One person is speaking and the other person is gathering thoughts to be the next to speak. Then when a speaker leaves a mike, I'll invite another person to come up and wait for a turn to speak.

I invite Mr. Fred Winsor and Ms. Helen Forsey to mikes one and two, please.

Please speak fairly close to the mike, so we can hear you well.

Go ahead, Mr. Winsor, for two minutes.

[Fred Winsor, As an Individual]

My name is Fred Winsor and I'm a policy advocate for various groups in Newfoundland and Labrador. One of the things that I worked on recently was this whole idea of trying to get the school system to teach civics. It's sort of a mind-boggling thing really. I thought that these kinds of things were being carried out and they weren't.

I think it's very encouraging that you folks are here. It's very emotional for me. I think it makes us a much stronger country and it's very, I guess, encouraging, more than anything else. Because Canada, as a country, is so large, you don't really understand it until you travel across it and live in various parts of it. It is very much in sectors, and this kind of session brings it together. It may not be what we all would like to see it to be, but it is what it is and as a result I think it's very positive. It's money well spent.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That's nice to hear. Thank you very much for those comments. They're very encouraging for us.

[Helen Forsey, As an Individual]

I'm Helen Forsey. I live in rural Newfoundland for three months a year, and in rural eastern Ontario for the other nine months. Democracy definitely needs some form of made-in-Canada proportional representation. I realize it's not simple. I realize that even more after listening today, but it is necessary to go that route in some form.

I liked witness Marilyn Reid's criteria, when she said it needs to be as simple as possible to understand—at least I think she said that—and that it has to take into account rural people and sparsely populated regions and areas. That's an adaptation of some of the systems that are out there that wouldn't work well for Atlantic Canada and for other rural parts of Canada. Whether Ms. Reid's or Mr. Ring's proposals, that's the sort of thing I hope the committee will take into account and consider very seriously and come up with something that has all the benefits of all those systems and none of the disadvantages.

Certainly, I'm opposed to the ranked ballot or alternative vote for the various reasons that have been put forward. The results are not proportional. In my opinion it's worse than first past the post, partly because it's so deceptive.

Say no to electronic voting. It's too risky. It's vulnerable to hacking, to errors like the Phoenix payroll system, for example, to malfunctions, to power outages—as a rural person—manipulation and coercion. For example, within a family, if somebody wants somebody else with less power to vote a certain way, a youngster or a spouse, and is looking over their shoulder while they vote...no, I think it's too vulnerable.

Say no to a referendum. This is a complex issue. Referendums don't generally work well for complex issues. I think the work you're doing is what needs to be done: the thinking through, the listening, the consulting. Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you so much.

[Kathleen Burt, As an Individual]

Hi. I'm 61 years old and I've had a chance to vote in 26 elections, both federal and provincial. Provincially my vote has counted 25% of the time and federally it has counted 0% of the time, so that's led me to become an advocate and a supporter of Fair Vote Canada.

I know that Fair Vote Canada has already submitted a report to you, so I'm not going to repeat that, but I'd just like to tell you that I'm a hopeless idealist. I still believe in government for the people by the people. Right now we have government for business by big corporations, but I believe in democracy. While I don't believe that voting is necessarily the most important part of democracy and certainly not the only part of democracy, it does have a very important job: to elect our government.

As a lover of democracy, I have always been interested in politics, like Mr. Dixon, from quite a young age. I've always taken part in political things for as much as my time, money, and energy allow. I have spoken about this to both my MPs, Scott Simms, when I lived in that area, and now Ken McDonald, who is currently my MP. I certainly advocated for proportional representation with my neighbours and my own political party and I have attended meetings to support it.

The most important thing to me is that we have diverse voices. We need a strong opposition to have good democratic government, and that includes a strong, vigorous, and free press, which we no longer have. That is one of the reasons we have a lot of voter disengagement, because right now I feel—especially in the last election—it was like prom queen and king voting all over again. We weren't really voting about issues. We were just voting for the most popular candidate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Could you just wrap up? Do you have a concluding remark to make?