Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 17th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Ms. May, you have the floor.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also wanted to take note and thank the people from Iqaluit, the citizens who are sitting in the audience tonight, and this very excellent panel as well.

I had chance to speak with Maatalii Okalik earlier, and I hope she'll come to the mike, not to put too much pressure on her. She's president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami Youth Council.

Just last month the parliamentary committee on indigenous and northern affairs was here specifically to talk about some of the difficult social issues that Franco brought to light. That committee was looking at the risks of suicide for Inuit youth, an issue that is really close to all our hearts, but not on our agenda tonight. I want you to know that we're all deeply concerned, and I hope we'll hear from more Inuit youth in our open mike session.

I'm going to turn my questioning to Mr. Anawak and Mr. Okalik as experienced politicians, federally and territorially. Not to turn your words against you, Mr. Okalik, because I wouldn't want to do that, but you said you go in with a clear mandate when you're a political party, and the Liberals did in this last election. Mr. Trudeau said very clearly that 2015 would be the last election held under first past the post, and in this riding, my friend Mr. Tootoo represented the Liberals in the election and had 47% of the vote, and our friend Mr. Anawak represented the NDP with 26.5% of the vote, which means that of the voters who did turn out in Nunavut, 73.5% voted for parties and candidates whose commitment was that 2015 would be the last election held under first past the post.

That's why this committee has been established. We're here because we've been asked to determine what will replace first past the post. It's unusual in the course of our hearings across the country to hear so many people say they don't see anything wrong with it. That's important to hear, but I want to turn it back to you and say that this is our mandate. This was a commitment in the election. It happens to have also been a commitment from my party, the Green Party. If you add the Greens, across Canada 63% of voters voted for a party that had a commitment to provide a voting system that would ensure, one way or another, that the way Parliament was constituted after an election would reflect the way Canadians voted, so that 39% of the vote would result in 39% of the power, instead of 39% of the vote giving 100% of the power.

This is the context we're in here as a committee, and I wanted to turn it back to you. I'll start with Mr. Anawak and then Mr. Okalik. I don't want to put you on the spot, but given that we are changing our voting system, what would you like us to be mindful of? What matters to the people of Nunavut?

I'm hoping I have time to ask all four panellists. I'll start with the politicians in the middle and then work my way out to the edges.

Jack, would you like to jump in on that one first?

[Jack Anawak]

Thank you.

When you're talking about proportional representation, my fear would be that we don't have the population. In our case it would have to be a special dispensation of the electoral system to take us into account, because we don't have the population base but we have the area.

When you're looking at the whole issue of proportional representation, in order for us to support it, it would have to be made pretty clear that this is Nunavut and it's different from every other jurisdiction in Canada. There has to be that special dispensation for us.

[Paul Okalik]

Qujannamiik.

I have no strong views on the current system, but if it has to be changed, as I said, I would prefer the alternative model. You're given choices, but the ticket is multiple choices on a preference basis, so at least there will be a majority of wishes expressed through that model, which chooses the candidate on a priority basis. That would be my preferred model.

I have real concerns about proportional representation. As I said, I believe in unity. I believe in trying to make sure that our country remains united, and the proportional model could eventually fracture our country. I'd hate to see the results at the end of the day. Although all the parties would be part of the tent, at the same time it would create real challenges for our country.

Qujannamiik.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

I'm not sure if I have time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Go ahead.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Okay.

How about you, Mr. Tootoo?

[Victor Tootoo]

I wasn't sure from your context whether that's why we're here or not, but I guess that's a debate you can have in the House.

If there's a change to the current system, I would encourage looking at a wider range of inclusivity in terms of demographics. It could be things like I mentioned earlier that Nunavut had considered prior to 1999, such as dual-gender ridings.

There's the question of the demographic in a riding. If there are, say, five candidates from one particular area who are going to be in the House, how many of those are age 16 to 25? How many are women? How many are minorities? If you're going to seriously look at a change to the electoral system to make it representative, then make it representative.

[Franco Buscemi]

The change I would like to see is not so much what system is—

I'm going to out my vote here. I, for one, ended up voting for a Liberal candidate, but I didn't vote for the Liberal Party. We can't make a blanket statement that every single person who voted for a Liberal candidate voted for electoral reform.

I believe low voter turnout is the issue. I don't think it's necessarily how we're electing people. I think, as Victor has alluded to several times, it's how we poll people. It's where we go to get the vote. We're wanting people to come to us, but I think it's becoming more and more clear that the polling stations need to be more accessible.

As for the change I would like to see in Nunavut, right now all the 300 parliamentary seats are divided by population, except for the three territories, which are guaranteed one seat, and I think that a new model needs to include how much land an MP is expected to represent, because that's a real barrier in the territories and not just in Nunavut.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Aldag now, please.

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

Thanks to each of our witnesses.

I'm finding this very interesting testimony. I'm sitting here listening and trying to compare.... I know there aren't comparisons between the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, but the three territories do have this unique challenge of large land bases and small populations.

What I've heard from many of you—or what I think I'm hearing—is that the existing system is working okay, yet in the other two locations, the other two territories, there was this question of proportional representation. It was felt that it was lacking, and that if somebody was being represented by a Liberal, you are going to have members of the territories who have voted for other parties and maybe don't see their voice represented.

Part of what I'm enjoying about this process is that it gives us a chance to look at different models. It doesn't have to be a straight first-past-the-post model or a straight proportional representation. We've been toying around with ideas. Is there a different model that we need to look at for the three territories in particular to try to give that sense of proportionality? Now, it may mean more seats, and I'm not sure that our government will go there, but I think this is the time to make those kinds of requests or to dream that dream.

Maybe I'll start with you, Mr. Tootoo. You made the comment you don't see the existing system as broken, yet if there were an opportunity to say maybe there's a way.... It could be the male-female dual-member ridings that we would come up with for the territories, or it could be that there's some sort of proportional piece. I just throw that out.

Is that worth looking at in terms of seeing if people could vote with the existing system, with maybe one seat for the three territories, or two seats, or three seats? Is there something we could do to meet some of these other needs? I don't know what that looks like. I just throw it out there for your thoughts, because what we're hearing is that people want to talk about what could be.

[Victor Tootoo]

Anything that allows women a better opportunity to be represented politically, I'm in favour of. I think the day of the old boys' club has come and gone. I think that a dual-gender riding and better representation for women in Nunavut would have been a great idea for us to start our territory with, and I'm sad that didn't happen.

Looking forward, I think that our decisions are better made by a collective that reflects what we look like and the discussion among us. Without that equal representation on a gender basis, we don't get those decisions.

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

Mr. Anawak, would you like to comment on this idea? I think it really is a question of what it might look like in Nunavut if there's an opportunity to try to give some sort of proportional flavour to our national system. How can we entertain that while respecting that perhaps the first-past-the-post system does work and does serve us well? If there were to be an add-on, what would that look like, in your opinion?

[Jack Anawak]

First of all, I think we're a very progressive territory. We've already had a woman premier, our current president of land claims for Nunavut is a woman, and our mayor is a woman, so I think we have a very progressive territory.

On the issue of proportional representation, my main concern would be that we don't get left out of the process because of our small population base. I really haven't thought about how a proportional representation system could transcend that. I would have to think about it some more. The last two MPs before the present one were women. At this point, I would be hard pressed to give you a detailed account of what should be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Go ahead, Mr. Richards.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Buscemi, you made it clear in one of your previous responses that you believe in the argument some are making that because some of the parties add up to about 63% of the vote, if it were in their platform to change the voting system, this change would occur. You indicated in your response that a lot of people could have voted for those parties for other reasons.

In order to ensure that any changes being proposed are in line with the wishes of Canadians, what should this committee be doing or recommending?

[Franco Buscemi]

The number one issue I see in Nunavut is the land our MP has to cover. I think if we had an MP for each region in Nunavut, we would see the voter turnout rise significantly. It would bring the vote closer to home and allow the government to have more engagement with the territory. Trying to travel across the territory in one term is a challenge, if you want to engage with all your constituents. That's the number one change I would make.

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

Would you say that's a principle we should be applying outside the territory? In other words, we don't want to be creating other ridings that are overly large and difficult to represent. Would that be an important principle to apply across the country?

[Franco Buscemi]

Yes. I believe the current practice is based on a population formula. I believe there's room to include the geographical masses of Canada. That's what we're known for, our great big country.

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

Yes. I appreciate that.

Mr. Okalik, I'll ask a similar question. You indicated that you don't see any issues with the current system. You mentioned that if we were going to do something, you had an idea of what it should be. Based on that same argument, is there something the government should do as part of the process to help ensure that any changes we make are changes Canadians want to see?

[Paul Okalik]

I'm Liberal, and I voted Liberal, but they have already broken some promises to Inuit. They can break this promise easily, because they broke promises to Inuit already. This is one promise they can forget about, perhaps.

I have no real issues with the current system. If you have to look at a different model, I think the alternative model is the best one I could see working for my territory.

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

Sure. If the recommendation is that the change is to be made—and obviously we wouldn't want to make a change lightly—and you believe that the system we have now has worked all right, do you think that's something we should put before the people? Should the people have a say, whether it be a referendum or some other way of putting it before the people to get their consent to change it, to make sure they want to go in that direction?

[Paul Okalik]

Most definitely. You're talking about potentially disenfranchising whole fractions of our nation, so I would insist on a vote for our country, because we're going to change it drastically if they choose to try and change it.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Richards.

We'll go to Ms. Romanado, please.