Electoral Reform Committee on July 7th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Boulerice.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Mayrand, is encouraging people to vote and increasing voter turnout an important part of Elections Canada's mission?

[Marc Mayrand]

I think the fairly recent amendments made clear that that wasn't Elections Canada's role.

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

Yes. We, in the NDP, believe in the importance of increasing voter turnout. For everyone's benefit and so that the analysts can make note of it, I'd like to point out that our Liberal colleagues are talking about involving Canadians and improving citizen engagement, including among young people. I want to draw attention to the fact that voter turnout increases by 7% when a voting system includes some level of proportional representation. I won't ask you to speak to that, Mr. Mayrand.

In 1979, the Pépin-Robarts commission recommended adopting a mixed member proportional system based on the one in Germany. In 2004, the Law Commission of Canada recommended a mixed member proportional system modelled after Scotland's. Under that system, two-thirds of MPs would be elected as they are today, in other words, through first past the post, and the other third would be elected using party lists.

More proportional representation can be achieved in a variety of ways, be it regionally or provincially. At the regional level, in urban areas such as Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal, it wouldn't be too difficult to imagine merging certain electoral districts to achieve that proportional representation. In rural areas with lower population density, however, we obviously wouldn't group the Northwest Territories together with the Yukon to create a multi-member seat.

Administratively speaking, would it be possible or manageable to have a system where certain urban or suburban electoral districts were grouped together but where electoral districts spanning vast areas retained their single-member seats?

[Marc Mayrand]

I think certain witnesses would be better suited to answer those questions. Given the country's diversity and size, the problems you are trying to solve will require a made-in-Canada solution. It's very tough to compare a country like Scotland with a country like Canada, which is essentially a continent. There is no doubt that, in the course of your work, you are going to have to find truly Canadian solutions. Relevant research has been done, so I'm certain you'll hear from witnesses this afternoon who can talk about that.

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

As democrats, we believe that Parliament should represent all of society's views, the oft-mentioned diversity of voices or plurality of ideas, and should, in fact, be representative of society itself. But we've got a problem. Only 13% of members elected in the last election are from visible minority groups. That percentage represents just half of the visible minorities that are part of Canadian society. In Canada's Parliament, only 26% of MPs are women, putting Canada in 49th place, behind Kazakhstan, South Sudan, and Tunisia. That's not much to be proud of.

Would you say that how we elect our MPs is one of the reasons why it's so difficult for Canada to achieve proportional, or realistic, representation in Parliament, particularly as regards visible minorities and women?

[Marc Mayrand]

It may be one of the factors contributing to the problem. How parties operate may be another factor, specifically in terms of the candidate selection process. Measures might be needed. For example, do any measures provide for funding to offset additional child care costs incurred during the election campaign? All sorts of measures can influence participation and diversity. That's my point.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have 10 seconds left.

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

We could adopt a system based on lists and rules requiring half of a party's candidates to be female.

[Marc Mayrand]

That's an idea.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Richards.

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

Thank you.

I want to return to the topic I was on earlier and I think others have been on. I just want to make sure I'm completely clear. I ask for your indulgence if you feel it's being repetitive.

You had indicated when we talked about the topic of the scenarios where the decision is that we're going to want to see a referendum conducted, but also a significant change to the system and those timelines.... I think that what I was hearing from you was that if you receive some kind of an indication prior to the end of this year, basically you could start to prepare for a referendum. I think it was in response to Mr. Christopherson's question.

I'm trying to get a sense of this. I think what you were saying there was that if you had an indication in the committee report that comes out by December, you would be able to start to prepare for a referendum and that would give you enough time. Was that what I heard or am I being inaccurate?

[Marc Mayrand]

What I was trying to convey is that as this whole process evolves there will be I expect, or I hope, more clarity. To me there are two markers in my mind. The first is December 1, which is the date of the report of this committee, and that will give me an indication of the level of consensus about possible reforms and all these things. As I monitor the environment, that will guide my actions. The next thing is that May 2017 or so I expect to see legislation in place.

I fully understand that to have legislation in place by May 2017 it has to be tabled in early winter, let's say. That's how I'm looking at things, that there will be events happening that will trigger my activation of various preparations and plans.

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

What I would want to know in a follow-up to that is, is there an absolute drop-dead date? Is there an absolute latest date by which you would need to have the government actually show its intention to actually call a referendum? We get that you might have some indication from this committee and the discussions here, but would there be some kind of a deadline by which you would have to have an absolute commitment that the government wants to call a referendum in order for there to be a referendum and to be able to conduct redistribution if it was necessary?

I just want to get a sense if there's an absolute deadline, that you would see it would be impossible to meet otherwise.

[Marc Mayrand]

It's very difficult.

Let's say by next spring there's nothing on the table. Right there, that tells me that unless some urgent meetings happen in the summer it means I won't see anything before the end of 2018. That means January 2019, and that means nine months before the election. I think we're out of it.

Again, I think that's why I put those markers; that's the one I'm using right now and there may be more as the environment evolves for sure.

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

Is there anything you can suggest that could be done now, that the government could do or could look at, in order to prepare for the possibility of a referendum? Is there anything you would suggest could be done now to better prepare or to ensure that is still a possibility and the timeline doesn't get away from us?

[Marc Mayrand]

I couldn't speak for the government. I don't know what scenarios—

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

Yes, but if you were asked for advice.

[Marc Mayrand]

—are being contemplated by the government and what actions are taking place.

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

What I'm asking is, are there legislative steps or is there anything that could be done to help better prepare for that possibility?

[Marc Mayrand]

There are all sorts of things, but probably the government needs also some sense of where this committee is going. Again, the first thing government would have to do is decide what kind of legislation they want to introduce. Do they want to amend the redistribution act? Do they want to amend the Referendum Act? Do they want to amend the Canada Elections Act or is there something else?

However, that's for the government to consider in terms of their plan of action and the timelines for it. I can't comment on that.

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

I understand that you have to react to what you're given, and I certainly appreciate the timelines you have to deal with and we appreciate knowing that you have given us some sense as to what it looks like for you in order to complete these things. We appreciate that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Last on the list, but not least, we have Mr. Aldag.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thank you.

I was going to get into the weeds a little, but since I'm now last on the list, I'm going to give you a chance for some final thoughts on four areas.

The first one is, as we move forward on looking at electoral reform, what would you say is the top challenge of our current system that we need to be aware of? Some of these you may have already covered, but I'll just give you a chance to wrap up.

[Marc Mayrand]

I did a presentation to PROC some time ago, looking at various social trends. One is that the changing demographic of our population and the increased savvy of Canadians with technologies are all factors. At least as an administrator, Elections Canada needs to get a little nimbler and more flexible, and needs to be empowered by legislation to adapt its services to the circumstances of electors. I think it's something we've seen in recent years, and there is an expectation out there, here in Canada and internationally in convention, that we adapt our service offering—for lack of a better expression—to the circumstances of Canadians. For me, this is one of the top challenges.

I feel that I've exhausted what the current legislation allows me to do to reach out, for example, to those with disabilities, or who are homebound, or to adapt the system such that we don't have lineups at the polls, as we've seen at advance polls.

I need your support on changing the legislation in these regards.