Electoral Reform Committee on July 7th, 2016

[Marc Mayrand]

Yes. There are some surveys that we've done and some studies that have been done across the country that suggest two things. Voting is an early habit. It's a habit that you need to develop early, otherwise you become an habitual non-voter. If someone misses two elections, it's much more difficult to bring the individual back.

The most significant factor or predictor of voting by young people is civic education. There is clear evidence that those who have been exposed to a civic education curriculum have a much higher propensity to vote. It's clear also that interest in voting comes from knowledge about democracy and your institutions. Again, that's where civic education is a significant influencer. It's probably, in my view, the most important influencer.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I would think that we—

[Marc Mayrand]

We can build all sorts of online services, remove all sorts of barriers, but if people don't have the interest, don't have the knowledge, they may not take advantage of the opportunity. I think these things go hand in hand.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I would think that we should play a role by encouraging our provincial allies to make sure their education systems favour that approach.

[Marc Mayrand]

Absolutely.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I'm all for encouraging early engagement in voting. At the same time, do you have any advice on how we can grab those who may have been disenfranchised along the way and haven't exercised their right to vote? Perhaps, for any number of variables, they're apart from the system.

[Marc Mayrand]

It is a most significant challenge and it remains a challenge for us. One thing that we've done over the last few years, one thing we found, is that it's better that those disengaged are re-engaged by people they relate to. If it's not their family or their teachers, it's maybe their friends. We're trying to leverage—that's not necessarily the right expression—various groups that are committed to engaging those who are more vulnerable or face barriers or are truly outside the system. It's by going through those channels that you improve your chances of success in re-engaging them. But it's an effort that requires time, consistency, perseverance, and also listening carefully to what these people have to say.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you kindly for your advice.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Reid, you may go ahead for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Mayrand, from my point of view it appears that the government is trying to run out the clock so that it will be impossible to have both a new electoral system that involves redistribution and a referendum on that new system. This can be done, of course, simply by refusing to say yes or no to a referendum until the deadline by which you could have done both things has passed.

I'm not asking for your comment on this, I'm submitting this to the world at large. I would submit that this explains the steadfast refusal of the minister yesterday to either endorse a referendum or to say that she rejects a referendum, while at the same time making it clear that she refuses to do what is necessary to modernize the referendum legislation.

My questions to you now revolve around how to stop the scenario of having the deadline on a referendum click by silently so that the government can, after the fact, finally introduce a real argument against a referendum, which is it's just too late.

Bearing this in mind, I've been looking at different options that would allow us to extend the clock a bit, and one I wanted to ask you about is a model used in the province of Ontario. Ten years ago the legislature in Ontario enacted a piece of legislation called Bill 155, Electoral System Referendum Act, 2007, which essentially said that the model that was then being designed would not be put in place unless there was a referendum on it.

I'm not sure if combining the government's proposed legislation on a new system with a clause that says this new electoral system will only go into effect if it's approved in a referendum.... If that were done as a single piece of legislation, would it be possible for you to implement this in less than the 26 months, plus six months, that I think we now face under the status quo?

[Marc Mayrand]

The two-year timing is not just driven by redistribution and a referendum or not, it's very much driven by the need to change our whole operation. No one in this country has experience in administering an alternative voting system. That's a profound change.

The other thing is that we have to redo all our systems. There are over 40 IT systems involved in an election. Not knowing the specifics, I can't tell you today, but I suspect that most of these systems will either have to be tuned or maybe scratched and started over again. That's why we need those two years. There's work in parallel. While redistribution is happening, the preparation for the election is also occurring, and that part takes two years.

Again, in other parts of the world, you will be looking I'm sure at New Zealand. It took almost 10 years before they ran into their new system. I'm saying yes, it's possible, but I'd be very cautious about trying to streamline it further and reduce that timeline. My advice would be you would put the election at risk.

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

Thank you. That's very helpful.

I only have a minute here. The New Zealand model, surely it was not 10 years from the time the legislation was passed for the MMP system until the first election was held.

[Marc Mayrand]

No, it was the whole cycle, starting from the parliamentary committee, public discussion, to finally getting an election under the new system that had been adopted. It was close to a decade, yes.

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

The New Zealand model of change in many ways is the one that has the most credibility here. I'm not saying that the MMP model they've used there is the best one, that would be premature of me. But the model of going through and transitioning is the closest thing I think we have to a gold standard for a Westminster-style country like Canada.

Could you take a look at what they did and point out to us—it can be in writing—any helpful lessons you can draw from that, that might guide us?

[Marc Mayrand]

I could propose witnesses to the committee who would speak directly to the New Zealand experience.

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

That would be helpful.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, that would be very helpful.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'd like to follow on the questions of Mr. Reid. I'm not sure it's an area that we've spent a lot of time talking about publicly just yet in terms of getting the horse in front of the cart here. I'm not sure the Conservatives have done their homework. If they have, I haven't figured out the strategy yet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would seem to me that you cannot hold a referendum during a federal election. In fact, if a writ has been dropped for a referendum and then there's a subsequent general election writ, even if the day of the referendum is scheduled for the day of the election, it's deemed nullified. Is that correct?

[Marc Mayrand]

You're correct. A referendum cannot be run in combination with an election.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Correct, so that means it has to be a stand-alone under the current act and in order to back it up a bit you need marching orders by May 2017 in order to meet all eventualities. As soon as you're given those, money starts being spent, time starts being focused, and there's no going back, you don't get to push the button reset and start another 26 months, you've got to do it all the first time around. One would think if you back it up another six months to prepare it so the referendum was say May 1, or the last day of April, now that puts us some time around December of this year. Is it fair to say that if we don't have a total package by December 16 to give to you to trigger a referendum, we would not be able to meet the deadline if it was a complete reform of the system and you needed most of that 26-27 months?

[Marc Mayrand]

Again—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

You don't follow that, I know, sorry.

[Marc Mayrand]

There are many variables at play here. I just want to be clear, I think it's possible to hold a referendum under the current legislation. What I need is an indication that a referendum will be happening so that I can start spending in preparation and preparing for it.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

When do you need that by?

[Marc Mayrand]

Again, the sooner the better. You mentioned, and it's certainly a case scenario among others, that there could be a referendum in spring 2017. That would be triggered by a proclamation that will have been proceeded by debates in the House of Commons, and these debates will have been announced in advance. I'm hoping we will get that six months, that we'll get enough indication to trigger the six-month activities.