Electoral Reform Committee on Oct. 26th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

As a point of information, when we are travelling, typically a committee holds hearings during the day and travels at night. We travelled in the morning so that we could hold hearings in the afternoon and evening, so that people who were working could come out in the evening. I guess some people prefer the afternoon, but it was an attempt to open it up to as many people as possible. That's the reason.

[Bradley Mullen]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I call Mr. Denzil Feinberg to mic number two, please.

We'll go to Mr. Shostal.

[David Shostal, As an Individual]

Thank you, everyone.

While I appreciate the hard work that you all do for us, I'd like to express my disappointment that so many elected representatives feel that it's okay to change the method by which we as electors elect you without our clear consent by way of a referendum. This would be akin to the owners of a business being told by the current employees what the hiring process is to be for all future employees.

This committee would be better to examine alternative electoral methods and make recommendations to Canadians on what they have determined might be a better alternative to first past the post, but it must be Canadians and all Canadians who make the final decision in the end. To do otherwise would be to completely undermine and violate, in my opinion, the sacred trust of the relationship between our elected representatives and those who elect them.

Our elected representatives govern on matters of legislation and state on our behalf and with our consent. In my opinion, changing the way we give our consent without our consent would be an abuse of the authority and trust we have given you.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Shostal.

I'd call Mr. Cosgrove to mic number one while we give the floor to Mr. Feinberg.

[Denzil Feinberg, As an Individual]

I'm Denzil Feinberg from Ottawa, formerly from Winnipeg, and originally from Cape Town, South Africa.

The southern hemisphere has some benefits. One was Australia's requiring that people have a compulsory vote. There are four to five other countries that have compulsory voting. I don't know who they are, but your committee has probably heard about this.

That to me should be an essential part of the next referendum. It will be a big thing to bring in, but I feel it would be right. It's just like the case with giving donations of organs: Spain requires it. and it's a negative option to get out of it. There are more countries that should adopt that system.

If Prime Minister Trudeau and his government decide that they will not go by this particular electoral vote and promise, then I will promise to reduce the money that I've given to them. It's quite nice, now that I'm 72 and get a great tax deduction in the voting system here, but I will redirect my donations away from the Liberals and put them more to the Green Party, Ms. May, because they deserve it because they're going to stick to their word.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Denzil Feinberg]

Another point is that I would prefer not to have a referendum. There are too many deplorables like me around, which means people who disagree with my way of thinking. I trust your expertise in going to this effort in learning about the various systems, so I don't want a referendum to decide against what you have studied so hard, and you have all the committee impressions that you get from us too.

Finally, I would like not to have a Wallonia or Walloons or somebody waiving a feather deciding, despite all the practical suggestions that have been heard so democratically, to undo everything. Your decision is what I would take as the one that should count.

I thank you for all that you've done for us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Ian MacDonald may advance to mic number two, and we'll hear from Mr. Paul Cosgrove.

[Paul Cosgrove, As an Individual]

Mr. Chairman and members, a number of former MPs and senators from all parties, and there were 40 in total, considered the issue of alternatives to first past the post, and that was in 1984 when looking at the issue of Senate reform. They reported that first past the post should be retained.

The committee observed that it had insufficient time to adequately study jurisdictions that had opted for alternative processes of voting, but more importantly it recommended that the election process for the House of Commons and the Senate be the same.

Your committee might wish to consider the potential effect of your recommendations on an elected Senate. Public support for an elected Senate continues today, and someday it may win the day. I'll be very interested in your analysis of alternative voting processes in other jurisdictions, and that will assist me in deciding which way I would go on the issue. I haven't decided one way or another.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, it's ironic that whatever the Commons decides on the issues before you, the non-elected Senate will pass judgment on the democratic elected process for the House of Commons.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Cosgrove.

I ask Mr. Andrew Madill to come to mic number one.

Mr. MacDonald, you have the floor.

[Ian MacDonald, As an Individual]

I'd like to thank you for spending your valuable summer and evenings doing this valuable work.

This has probably already been identified, but some first nations friends of mine do not consider themselves part of Canada, and they do not vote federally. Any consideration of mandatory voting should consider the first peoples' needs. I don't know...are we allowed to ask individual committee members a question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Not really. It's not the format.

[Ian MacDonald]

Okay; well, my question is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You can still ask it. It's just that we're not going to get into a conversation. Ask it rhetorically, if you'd like.

[Ian MacDonald]

Well, it's open, then.

My understanding from a presentation I saw on the U.K. electoral reform society was that electoral reforms are not advised unless there was a long lead time to enable voters to become knowledgeable about the issue and that the timeline for this election wouldn't be sufficiently long.

I'm just wondering if this was the general consensus from what most referendum expert witnesses who presented said.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I don't believe the society was for a referendum.

The point is well taken. It's important that people be adequately informed. We'll leave the timelines to the committee's report, but it's important to engage the public. This is why we're doing this and why we've had hearings both in Ottawa and across the country.

[Ian MacDonald]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Thompson, could you please go to mic number two?

Now we'll hear from Mr. Madill.

[Andrew Madill, As an Individual]

Thank you. Good evening. My name is Andrew, and right now I live here in Ontario, but I was born in Saskatchewan and raised in Manitoba. That's where my roots are, and so my own life experience along with my studies and political interest have shaped a strong appreciation for regional interests. In other words, the closer our system brings politics to the local level, the better.

Federal politics are driven by intense disagreements over ideology or grand visions, but the best test of political success and what should be our primary motivation is to make life better and find the common good on the ground. Every place has its own needs and way of life, and this includes across as well as within provinces, and that deserves to be heard in the government.

Everyone knows that first past the post isn't perfect, but if it does nothing else well, then it keeps elected representatives in contact with their local ridings, and that's incredibly important. At the very least, any reform to the voting system should do that exact same thing, only better.

I would like to point out that within the committee responsible for the consultation, I've noticed that over half of the members are from Quebec or Ontario. The process is looking a lot like regional alienation all over again, and that's my fear. Therefore, I strongly believe that the right way to bring about change and to involve not only the provinces but every riding is to bring this question to a referendum.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Madill.

I would invite Roderick Ramsden to mic number one.

Mr. Thompson, please go ahead. You have two minutes.

[Nicholas Thompson, As an Individual]

Good evening, members of the electoral reform committee. My name is Nicholas Thompson, and I'm from Peterborough, Ontario.

I am here tonight because I believe that the Canadian government is taking an undemocratic approach to the electoral reform.

When the last election was held here in Canada, I was unable to vote as I was 17 years of age. This year, I am now 18, so I have the privilege and the right to vote and participate fully in Canadian democracy.

Will the electoral reform committee deny me my vote by not holding a referendum? Will you deny me this democratic right? Will you not let my voice be heard on this issue that I feel so strongly about? Will you disregard my concerns regarding this issue and will you deny me my right to vote?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Thompson.

I would mention, though, this committee is a consultative committee and not a decision-making committee, so those decisions will belong to the government. We will be making recommendations, but we won't be making those kinds of decisions.

Ms. Darian Bittle, please go to mic number two.

Mr. Ramsden, it's your turn.

[Roderick Ramsden, As an Individual]

Thank you.

I think any attempt at electoral reform must go to referendum. I've come to this conclusion based on my experience as a resident of Ottawa Centre. I've lived in the riding my entire life, and when speaking with friends, neighbours, and family who also live in the riding, none of them knew about the consultation process that was held in Ottawa Centre. I only found out about the consultation process in Ottawa Centre three days after it occurred, through a newspaper article.

For this reason, I think the consultation process is fundamentally flawed and I think that a referendum must be called prior to any changes.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ramsden.

Mr. David Gibbons, please come to mic number one.

Ms. Bittle, go ahead, please.