Evidence of meeting #14 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Again, I don't want to pre-empt the committee, but it's my thinking that we don't even go to magazines and hydro bills and stuff. Those are not acceptable forms of identification--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
--and I'm suggesting that we word this very carefully, that that is no longer the case. A driver's licence, a health card, a passport, a senior citizen card, a birth certificate, proof of citizenship—we can expand the list. Any of those two....
Are we comfortable with that so far?
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
I would like to get back to Mr. Hill's comment regarding the date of birth. This should not be used as proof of identity but only as a validation. It is easy to find out the birth date of anyone. This must be recognized.
Suppose I shaved my head for a campaign in favour of Leucan before having the picture taken for my health card and that three years later I show this picture to the scrutineer. Since my appearance will have changed greatly, this scrutineer could, on his own initiative, ask my date of birth. So this would be a tool for validation, but not identification.
I am going to explain how things are done in Quebec. All this screening takes place when people who come to vote enter the polling station. There is always an agent designated by the returning officer in charge of directing people to the proper table. Depending on their address, he directs them to a given section. It is also this individual who asks voters to show photo identification. If the voter says he does not have any, he or she is immediately directed to the attestation table. This is not being done at the polling table.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
We'll get the wording to encompass all of these great ideas and we'll bring it back on Tuesday.
We'll hear a final comment from Mr. Hill, please.
Conservative
Jay Hill Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
Since there may be some confusion about what I was suggesting, I wasn't suggesting it be used as a form of identification, but as a validation, simply as what Mr. Guimond is suggesting; that is, if you don't have photo ID and are using two other acceptable types of identification—whatever we have agreed they are—then as further validation you should be asked your birth date.
It sounds as though that's what's already done in Quebec. Quebec is a step ahead, in the sense that the voters there won't be surprised if the federal process is the same as the one they're already used to.
As Mr. Simard seemed to suggest, it's potentially going to take a bit of an advertising and educational program for the rest of the country, and maybe it'll be different province by province, if people have grown accustomed to using a magazine label as being sufficient at a polling station. If it's no longer sufficient, we're going to have to educate them not to show up like that, because they're going to be disappointed and angry, and then they may go away and not vote.
None of what we're doing here is to try to deter people from voting. In fact, it's quite the opposite. We want to encourage them to know that the system is fraud-proof to the extent that they can rely on the results and therefore be encouraged to cast their ballot.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I couldn't agree more.
I'm going to recommend that we reword this clause and revisit it Tuesday morning at our next meeting.
We have time to deal with one final thing—it's not in the list—and that is just confirmation from the committee regarding advertising at the polling stations: that it is an offence, and saying what those offences are. Whatever they are, we'll look in the act and we'll instruct—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
It could be a poster, correct, or perhaps more than one—a minimum of three.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I'm sorry, Monsieur Guimond; it's not in there. It was left out accidentally. But since we're running out of time, I'm trying to deal with some of the issues I know the committee was supportive of.
Are we in agreement on advertisements at the poll indicating that it is an offence and what those offences are?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
In the two official languages. Merci beaucoup. I think that goes without saying, but I appreciate your pointing it out.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Well, I was quite aware.... You didn't have to tell me, Mr. Godin.
Mr. Proulx.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I would be very interested to see if Elections Canada could tell us whether there are communities where it should be in additional languages, whether aboriginal or.... I'm not going to name any, because I'm going to forget some, but some communities.... We would again get that information through Statistics Canada.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
I think we already communicate in those languages in certain polls.
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
The logical way to do it is to say that when X% of the population in a riding--we already have statistics by riding given to us--are of a non-official language....
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Again, I don't want to open a can of worms. I just want to try to get the wording down. It's in the two official languages and in any other languages that are appropriate for the riding. Is that an acceptable wording? I'm getting agreement on that. Thank you.
Was there more comment?
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
I'd just like to go back a little bit. I'm not sure if we didn't miss something here. Jamie just wrote me a little note saying that he thinks Mr. Kingsley said that the magazine labels are used for proof of address, not identity.
One of the fraud issues is where you live, your residency. You can prove who you are, right? You have your ID and all that, but you could vote 10 times. You could have a magazine label from here; you could have a magazine label from the next riding. That is apparently what's happening. We've dealt, I think, with identification. I'm not sure we've dealt with proof of residency. Or have we?
