Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 7th, 2016

[Nicholas Decarie, As an Individual]

Thank you.

As a young person, I feel the need to speak in favour of proportional representation because our current system is doing an atrocious job of giving a voice to youth. I'm sure we all felt pretty good about ourselves with the last election, last year, when 58% of young people came out to vote, but let's be realistic: that's not going to happen again.

I'm a student, by the way.

In fact, 58% is a failing mark. It's a D.

Normally the turnout for youth voters is less than 40%. That's an F; it's a failure. If our electoral system, when we grade students, is a failure, we need to change it to something that's actually going to work and give young people a voice.

Many, particularly our parents, our grandparents, and the media, might call us apathetic or narcissistic and say that we're just not interested in voting. That's not true. We actually are very passionate about this. If you'd turn on a Facebook feed and maybe tune into an election, we have a lot to say, but we feel so alienated and isolated from the issues being discussed that we don't feel as though our voices are being heard. We feel that politicians don't care for what we have to say or what our interests are.

If proportional representation were implemented, we'd feel more that we have a voice, and that even in safe ridings where maybe youth views would not be as prevalent, we can at least make our voices heard. Just because we voted Harper out doesn't mean that we're going to show up to vote again the next time.

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

We'll hear now from Ms. Rhonda Connell.

[Rhonda Connell, As an Individual]

Thank you.

First I'd like to thank all the committee members for being here this evening and hearing our viewpoints.

I'm in favour of proportional representation in the form of a mixed member system.

I have voted many times and many times, except once, my vote was orphaned. My vote was not the most popular choice in my area, so it did not receive representation, but a true democracy represents all people, including minorities.

We have a great opportunity at this time in history to make important changes to our electoral system, so my message is very simple. I want my vote to be counted. I want my vote to be represented. I want my views and my values to be represented in Parliament, the governing body that makes laws and policies that affect my life.

We are all equal citizens and our votes should have equal value.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Gail Campbell.

[Gail Campbell, As an Individual]

I applaud this committee for the way it's demonstrating that all parties can work together in a spirit of co-operation.

I'm a historian, the only historian among the academics who prepared background papers for the 2004 New Brunswick commission on electoral reform, and although I am strongly in favour of the institution of a system of proportional representation in Canada, my purpose here is also to provide some historical background.

First, I suspect that many New Brunswickers who attended here today aren't aware of the fact that until 1970, New Brunswick, provincially, had multiple-member ridings.

Do we need a referendum? People argue that we must have a referendum to make a change in our electoral system. Not so. There is no historical evidence for the argument that momentous changes in our electoral system require consulting the people through that medium.

Traditionally, momentous changes in our electoral system have been made without recourse to consultation of the electorate through a referendum. The secret ballot was introduced without a referendum. Manhood suffrage was introduced without a referendum. Women's suffrage was introduced without a referendum. First nations suffrage was introduced without a referendum. Lowering the voting age did not require a referendum. The introduction of a new system of enumeration of voters, which, by the way, resulted in a decline in voter turnout, did not require a referendum. Finally, and most recently in this province, the shift from multiple-member to single-member constituencies in New Brunswick, so controversial, was made without recourse to a referendum.

I hope the committee may make a recommendation that accommodates the need for everyone's vote to count, that the government may accept that recommendation, and may we at last get electoral reform.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Finally, we have Mr. Pugh.

[Jason Pugh, As an Individual]

I wasn't prepared to come here today at all. I didn't know you guys actually had the open mikes at these meetings. I've been watching them on CPAC and, Nathan, you actually private messaged me in response to a Facebook message I sent you a long time ago.

My name is Jason Pugh, and he said I should come by, so I checked Matt's newsletter and saw you do have this. I had an appointment up until seven o'clock and just ran down here.

I do watch more CPAC, which is probably detrimental to my mental well being. I work from home. When I was at the office, I'd sneak in question period in a little window, but I continued to work, of course.

I only want to say welcome to Fredericton. I'm glad you're all here—even our friends from the Conservative Party. I'm joking. I'm glad you get to see us in this nice, beautiful weather.

With regard to the referendum, 63% of the people voted for MPs running on electoral reform, so despite the Liberals getting a majority with 39%, the referendum was 63% voted for MPs running on electoral reform.

Nathan, you were talking to Mr. Dutil and the discussion was about evidence. He said it was simply a coincidence that in proportional representation countries there is more female representation, and he said that's not evidence, and you said evidence isn't evidence, which was pretty funny. That's one of the things that shows that we need it.

You can say to every Canadian—sorry, I'm nervous; I'm not used to talking in front of people. The most basic thing that makes the most sense is that 30% means 30%. There's no argument you can make that says it makes sense to go against that. It's just the bottom line. Mixed member proportional representation is what I've been hearing from everyone here. I've not been to every meeting you guys have had across the country, but I'm sure that's the majority of what you're hearing, so I think it is this committee's duty to go to Mr. Trudeau and say the majority of people want mixed member proportional representation.

Thanks, and if you go to the market tomorrow, you have to get a samosa.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Thank you for all of those thoughtful comments. As we close here, I just thought everyone might be interested in some statistics on our three-week cross-Canada tour, which is ending tonight. We have one more stop in Iqaluit in about 10 days, but essentially, this is the last night of three weeks of intense travel.

We did 15 days on the road. We visited 17 communities. The number of witnesses we heard from on the road, including tonight, was approximately 108. Before that, we heard from 58 witnesses in Ottawa. At the open-mike sessions, as of the end of the day yesterday, we had 549 people come up to the mike. As of yesterday at 3 p.m., we've received 376 briefs, of which 119 are now on the web in bilingual format and 257 await translation. We also have an electronic questionnaire, which is available on the website. The number of completed e-consultation questionnaires is close to 19,000.

Just as a point of information, you have until midnight tonight to complete the questionnaire and submit your comments. We made the decision that it would be Vancouver time, so that gives you a little extra time.

All in all, I think we've been pretty thorough in our work, and it will continue when we get back. We'll have more hearings there, and then we'll get down to the hard work of writing a report.

Mr. DeCourcey.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Mr. Chair, by way of wishing everyone here a happy Thanksgiving, I think we should highlight the tremendous work of the logistics team, our capable clerks, analysts, and interpretation and the tremendous work they've done to keep us moving throughout these three weeks. None of that is possible without this wonderful team who got us out of bed at an ungodly hour most mornings and kept us fed and working through until 9 or 9:30 some evenings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Richards.

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

If I could add to that, I want to express the same sentiment, so I'll echo what Mr. DeCourcey said.

Also, having had the privilege of serving in the position that you're serving in, Mr. Chair, on special committees such as this, and one that has travelled across the country, next to our clerk, our analysts and our interpreters and technicians who all put in hard work, the person who has the greatest responsibility is you. You have to be in your chair and alert at all times. The rest of us are at least able to get up and go for a coffee, or things like that. Mr. Chair, you've done a great job as well, so we want to recognize you for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much, Mr. Richards, but you all have the very difficult task of coming up with some probing questions, and that's a lot of work too.

It's been great to be here today and tonight. We wish you all a safe journey home tonight.

Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.