Electoral Reform Committee on July 7th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Good morning everyone.

Welcome, Mr. Mayrand. We, on the committee, were very eager to meet with you this morning. You have valuable insight that will help us make informed decisions.

We have with Mr. Mayrand today Stéphane Perrault, the deputy chief electoral officer, regulatory affairs, and Michel Roussel, deputy chief electoral officer.

Without further ado, I will now turn the floor over to you, Mr. Mayrand.

[Marc Mayrand, Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am pleased to be here today with my officials to meet committee members during their study of viable alternative voting systems to replace the first-past-the-post system and their examination of mandatory voting and online voting.

I will keep my introductory remarks brief. I should point out that, as the Chief Electoral Officer, I perform the role of administering the Canada Elections Act and the Referendum Act, and organizing and overseeing the conduct of electoral events. This also includes administering the political financing provisions of the acts, monitoring compliance, and conducting appropriate public information campaigns.

When there is a readjustment of federal electoral boundaries, which normally takes place after every decennial census, my role is to support the independent commissions and implement the new boundaries set by those commissions.

Finally, after a general election, I submit to Parliament a report containing legislative amendments that, in my opinion, are desirable for better administration of the acts.

My next recommendations report will be submitted to the Speaker of the House of Commons in early fall. This report is typically referred to and examined by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which is responsible for matters related to the election of members to the House of Commons.

My recommendations will include proposed amendments to the Canada Elections Act related to the voting process and the regulatory regime. Adopting these amendments will be essential to improving the experience of voters and political entities, irrespective of the voting system in place for the next general election. In that regard, these recommendations are complementary to the work of this committee.

Given the nature of my mandate, I intend to support the work of this committee by highlighting the administrative aspect of operationalizing changes that the committee may study. This is particularly important given the very short time frame available to make changes to the voting system, if they are to be in place for the next general election.

I do not intend to address the pros and cons of various electoral systems. The committee will hear about this from its witnesses, including members of the academic community, and perhaps groups representing citizens, and citizens themselves. As I indicated at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs in April when they appeared on my office's main estimates, legislation enacting a reform should be in place well in advance of the next election to allow for proper implementation. I note that the government has committed to having legislation in May 2017, which I am comfortable with. In this regard I would like to point out some key considerations related to the implementation of a new voting system.

First, some alternative voting models you may consider may well require a redistribution of electoral boundaries. The current legal framework does not allow for redistribution except after each decennial census, and the current boundaries are supposed to be in effect until 2023. Nor does it allow for multi-member seats or regional groupings. Should redistribution be required because of a change in our voting system, enabling legislation will need to be put in place. Under the current regime the last redistribution exercise took 26 months to fully complete, and that was based on the newly compressed timeline that was enacted in 2011. While there may be ways to further reduce the timeline, the redistribution process should continue to reflect the fundamental principles of independence and neutrality through the establishment of an independent commission and a mechanism for public consultations.

Second, the introduction of a new voting system may make it difficult to publish the outcome of the election on election night by completing the counting of ballots manually at voting sites, as is currently the case. Canadians are accustomed to learning the results of elections quickly, and any possible delay should be considered carefully by the committee. For example, some systems require either moving all ballot boxes to a central counting place, which carries risk and can take significant time given our geography, or more likely would require the introduction of electronic tabulation at all polling places to ensure the timely release of election results on election night.

Third, in looking at other voting systems the committee may wish to consider the possible impact on the current political financing regime.

Fourth, consideration should also be given to the preparation of electors and election officers. An extensive public education campaign would be needed to ensure that Canadians understand the new system, and can exercise both their right to be a candidate and their right to vote. This is an aspect that cannot be overlooked and has been critical in other countries that have changed their electoral system.

My mandate in this regard would need to be clarified. The recruitment and training of election officers would also be crucial to ensure proper administration of the new rules.

Let me now turn briefly to online voting and mandatory voting. It is undeniable that many Canadians would benefit from the introduction of online or Internet voting. Internet voting would remove barriers and make a vote more accessible for various groups such as voters with mobility challenges, including seniors, those with visual impairments, and Canadians abroad. That being said, caution is needed in moving forward to ensure that Canadians continue to have the same high level of trust in the integrity of their elections. In this regard we are not currently planning to offer online voting in 2019. However, Elections Canada would certainly welcome direction from this committee in terms of a desirable approach in moving forward with Internet voting.

In examining this issue, the committee should consider a number of aspects, including social acceptance and the challenges that online voting present for the integrity and secrecy of the vote. I would ask the committee to consider the scope of the introduction of online voting, which may include limiting its use to particular groups of electors who would benefit most from this option, such as those with disabilities or Canadians living abroad.

Finally, with respect to mandatory voting I will simply note that there is a relatively broad range of experiences internationally. Currently 23 countries have legislation providing for mandatory voting at the national level. While I take no position on the merits of mandatory voting, I would encourage the committee to pay attention to several considerations during its study, including the provision of a compliance mechanism through sanctions or positive incentives, whether or not there should be exceptions for certain groups of voters, and of course acceptance by Canadians.

In closing, Mr. Chair, I wish to assure you that I and members of my staff will be happy to assist the committee in looking at these matters, particularly the operational and implementation aspect of various options for reform that the committee is considering.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to address the committee today as you begin work on your important mandate to review options to ensure that Canadians are effectively represented in the House of Commons. This rare opportunity does not happen often in many democracies. I wish you well in your work and I look forward to the outcome of your deliberations.

My colleagues and I are now available to answer your questions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Fellow members, we have an hour and 10 minutes. If my math is right, that should be enough time for two rounds of questions. Each member will have five minutes.

Is everyone in agreement?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Great. Every member will have two turns.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Wonderful. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We'll begin with Mr. Aldag.

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

Thank you so much for your presentation and for being here this morning.

I am particularly interested, in part because of my background in the public service, largely in communications.

Looking at some of the education and communications aspects of what would be involved in introducing a new system, on page 4 of your submission you talk about how critical it would be to have an extensive public education campaign. You note that your mandate in this regard would need to be clarified.

Could you expand on that, and what you would be looking for as far as clarification in that public education component?

[Marc Mayrand]

Clearly, given the very substantive changes that may be recommended by the committee, I think voters would need to be well informed to understand the new system. Systems can become quite complicated at times and even if they are not, there will be changes. It's important that voters understand what those changes mean in terms of how they exercise their options to select their representative.

Experience shows that such education needs to start early. It's not enough to do it only during a campaign; it has to start much earlier than that. I would suggest at least a year before the election so, again, that there are no surprises when electors show up at the polls and are asked to mark their ballots under a format that is different from what they are used to.

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

When you indicate that your mandate needs to be clarified, is there an issue with your existing mandate, or would you simply be able to jump into that kind of public education piece?

[Marc Mayrand]

My current mandate limits my education role to those who are under 18, so I think that's a limitation. Of course, I can inform electors of how and where to vote, but I think given that changes are being contemplated, we maybe need more than simply explaining where and how to vote.

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

If you could remind me, is that a recent change? I don't know if that's always been the case or if that was something—

[Marc Mayrand]

That change was introduced in 2014.

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

It's good to understand what would be needed there because I agree as we get into a potentially more complex system than we currently have, having that education for public understanding is going to be critical so that people can take full advantage of what it is that we're trying to do.

You indicate on page 3 of your notes, where you're talking about the timelines, “the Government has committed to having legislation in place by May 2017, which I'm comfortable with.” I take from that statement that you're saying that if the legislation does indeed fall into place by May 2017, you and your office would be able to have a new system. Could you just give us a summary of what components you would see being included in that? For instance, does that include things like the education campaign?

[Marc Mayrand]

Certainly. There are always various aspects to an election. The first one is the logistical aspect, procuring the material, developing the new procedures, the new training materials for poll officials who have no experience. No one in Canada has experience with an alternative system, so we're starting from a blank page there.

Beside these aspects, we also need to look at the infrastructure, the technology that will be required to be put in place; ensuring that we procure the hardware, the software, the services that are needed to support the delivery of the election; and, of course, the educational aspect of the election, which needs to be planned very early on.

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

On that point, if we were to look at things like some form of online voting or electronic voting, would the timeline of May 2017 include that kind of introduction, or would it be more of a status quo?

[Marc Mayrand]

I have no plans to introduce online voting for 2019. I would need, certainly, very clear directions in that regard. I think there's still a lot of research to be done, and there are many considerations. That's what I would like to see the committee doing in its work, addressing some of the key considerations and giving us some direction on where we should go and how should we proceed to explore and test online voting at some point. I doubt very much that this could be done by 2019, given the scope of the reform we're looking at. I think that would be a significant burden on capacity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We're going to go to the Conservatives now, and Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayrand, for appearing here. I was very much saddened to learn that you will be leaving us, retiring at the end of this year, so let me just start by saying, having served on the committee that oversees you, the procedure and House affairs committee, for the past several years, what a pleasure it has been to work with you and how much I've been impressed by your sense of professionalism throughout that period.

[Marc Mayrand]

Thank you.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I wanted to start by turning to your comments, the ones that Mr. Aldag just referred to, “the Government has committed to having legislation in place by May 2017, which I'm comfortable with”. My understanding is actually that the government has committed to introducing legislation within 18 months, which is to say by April 2017, and has actually not committed to having legislation in place. This would mean through the House and through the Senate and given royal assent by May 2017. There is a point somewhere after May 2017, and I don't know what that date would be, where from your point of view it becomes impossible to implement any new system that involves a redistribution and maybe other considerations. What is the drop-dead date? May 2017 you pulled out for other reasons, but I don't think it accurately reflects where the government said it was going in its throne speech.

[Marc Mayrand]

We may have a different understanding of the government view on that, but as I indicated before, we need at least two years before the general election. Again, this is somewhat hypothetical because I don't know which system will be put forward at this point. As details come through, as the calender gets a little bit clearer, I'll be able to come back to the committee and indicate the challenges we're facing and the feasibility of doing what we are being asked to do.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

That would be very reasonable. Thank you, I appreciate that.

Let me turn to another issue that has come up regarding timing. On April 21 of this year you informed the procedure and House affairs committee, in response to a question I placed, that Elections Canada would require a minimum of six months to prepare a referendum. I wanted to reconfirm, first of all, that you still regard six months as an accurate length of time you would need, and then to ask when the clock starts running on those six months. Is it triggered by a formal message from the Government of Canada that they intend to hold a referendum or is there some other point from which you are counting those six months?

[Marc Mayrand]

Of course, the official trigger is a proclamation. Normally, there would be a discussion in the House regarding the question. That would be an early indication for us. Again, as we've done over the years, we constantly monitor the environment to try to estimate or assess the likelihood of a referendum and decide what efforts we should be putting into preparing for one. The six months is under the current Referendum Act.

That's the only assumption I can make at this point. Again, we live in a period of uncertainty in this regard, so I can't pinpoint precisely when we would start the six months. I can confirm with the committee that we've started to develop contingency plans, trying to identify what would need to be done. A referendum hasn't been held since 1992, as you know. We've started to identify work that need to be pursued to— There's no procurement; there are no activities in that regard. These things take time.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Would you be comfortable at some point sharing those plans with us? It could be in the form of a written document sent to us during hearings specifically.