Evidence of meeting #3 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 election.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
I do agree with you. The error rate on it, to me, is above where it needs to be, and we have been doing the same type of thing to try to clean the list.
You send out your voter ID cards by first-class mail. I would then assume you receive boxes of them back as non-deliverable.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
The number that we receive back is, in proportionate terms, very low. It is very low. When we review this, if the committee wishes, perhaps as part of that review we'll share those statistics with you and tell you what it is that we get back, what kinds of problems and how we solve them. We should do that at--
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Using your same list, I get a lot more back. Maybe it's an isolated case by riding, but we'll certainly use that, because it seems to be the only way to clean the list--to mail everybody on it and then change it.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
That may be a suggestion. Perhaps we could be doing that each year. Perhaps we should.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Yes.
It also answers some of my colleagues' points that some postal workers may be leaving them. Those should surely be sent back as not delivered, and maybe they're not. That may be another piece of that too.
We spoke of an oath being used as a method of verifying identification for those without identification. Whenever there is a doubt, the person will sign an oath, and it says that is true. Do you have an approximate number for how many oaths are used per riding or across the country? An average by riding may be the issue. Is it something that is used far more strictly by some returning officers than others? We heard of a case from my colleague where the returning officer was asking for identification. You say that's not correct. Then, in the case where we can't ask for identification, how often is someone asked to supply the oath?
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
We would have to go into the poll books to find the answer to that, and that is not something that is done regularly. If the committee wishes, perhaps we could undertake such a review and provide you with the statistics. I'd like to know if this is something the committee would like, because that would represent work. I don't mind that, but....
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
It's not something I'm necessarily asking for; I'm just trying to get a feel for this. It's a citizenship piece. Something that was asked a lot during the election was for proof of citizenship. As we've already heard, if I walk in with a voter's card and without ID, I'm allowed to vote. Yet there's no proof of citizenship asked for there. We've already said that certainly the voter card could go out to someone without citizenship through the tax rolls. The affidavit certainly says on it “I am a Canadian citizen”, but they've already checked the box someplace on the tax form that gives that same information.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Please remember, sir, they're not added to the list from the income tax forms.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
It is only to change people from one address to another if they're already on the list. To get on the list, at a moment in time they had to tell someone that they were Canadian citizens, or to attest to that.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Then I'll ask a follow-up question to that.
If the check box on the tax form isn't how I get on the voters list, how do I do that? What are the numbers of ways? How do I get on the voters list initially?
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
We write to the persons who check off that box and offer them the opportunity of writing back to us by simply posting the letter back saying they want to be added to the list. However, as with everything else, we have a 20% return rate for those who should be answering, and therefore we could be significantly improving—should the recommendation that I've made be approved changing the Income Tax Act—because this is the main means of adding youth to the list. Youth are notorious for not responding to the mail that we send, but if they bother to check the two boxes “I am a Canadian citizen” and “I do wish to share the information to be added to the list”, that would simplify greatly adding youth to the list. It is the main means we have under the system now. Otherwise we're caught having to reply to them.
12:40 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
I do want to add one element, sir.
Every poll has a bold notice on the wall: I am 18 years of age and I am a Canadian citizen. Every poll has that. We added that in the 1997 general election as a result of comments made at this table.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you.
Mr. Reid and then Monsieur Godin.
I have room for one more speaker; if not, we will wrap it up. We are coming to a close.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Mr. Hawn gave the example of a bus with roughly 40 people on it, with one person resident in the poll saying they wanted to vouch for these people. His scrutineers objected vigorously and were successful at stopping that, but that had a lot to do with having someone who is aggressive in place on the ground.
In the case of the example Mr. Lukiwski mentioned, of the particular box at a poll that had over 100% participation and some other very interesting anomalies, there was no scrutineer present. It is difficult to arrange in many ridings, quite frankly, to have a scrutineer from all parties present at all polls, particularly when polls are widely spread geographically, although that can also be an issue in urban areas. This suggests there certainly are openings for wilful electoral fraud.
Again, I mentioned there had been a discussion in the Canadian media about at least the theory that fraud was occurring in some areas, and in some ridings on a reasonably widespread basis, which raises an obvious question for me. It seems to me that the legislation could be amended to say that where someone doesn't have the proper identification and comes in and signs an oath, the ballots could be set aside and kept secret. We have the means to do that sort of thing. Mail-in ballots are kept secret--they are placed in a double envelope, with the inner one not being marked. The ballots could be kept secret until an after-the-fact verification occurs. That would ensure effectively that one could confirm whether or not the person was simply left off the list—I certainly know from my own riding there were lots of people left off the list who have a right to vote—without actually making it possible for people to engage in the kinds of fraud that are alleged to be occurring.
I would be interested in your thoughts on the observation I've just made.
12:40 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Number one, with respect to scrutineers, I'm glad you raise the point. In effect, the comment you're making leads me to believe that perhaps the Chief Electoral Officer should take special means over and above the provision of a deputy returning officer and a clerk where scrutineers are not available from parties. It must be remembered that part of the strength of the system was supposed to be candidates providing scrutineers so that they are present where things occur.
With respect to 100% or more of electors voting, I want to remind people that because of the polling day registration that is permissible under our law, it's only an appearance that 100% or more of the people voted. It's an appearance, because a lot of the people who were on the list did not vote. In effect, if your comment were true, there's a lot more that would have occurred that would not have been correct. It's possible under our system for more than 100% of the people who are on the list at a particular poll in numbers to have voted because of the polling day registration. I'll remind members that we did provide the listing by poll of the people who registered on polling day, subject to review.
With respect to your suggestion of holding ballots for those who registered on polling day—I think this is what you were recommending—that is something that could be done. Where we would go and check, I don't know, but these are things we could be pursuing. I've attempted in the past to get lists of Canadian citizens from the citizenship department, but I'm not entitled to them as Chief Electoral Officer. I've attempted to get lists of non-Canadians, because they have lists of non-Canadians, but I cannot get them either.
Perhaps we should be looking at that as an additional means, and perhaps we could also be reconsidering polling day registration, if it is a deep concern to members.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you very much.
Next is Monsieur Godin, please. I have my complete list of members. Please go ahead.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I am very proud to be able to say that in my riding of Acadie-Bathurst, 76.1 per cent of the people voted. This is a riding that is very active when there are elections. I think they even hold the record.
I'd like to go back to the issue of returning officers who will be appointed under the new act, if it is passed. Who will appoint the deputy returning officer? What is your opinion?
Our colleague raised certain issues. Yes, it is time for the legislation to change. People are frustrated when they see these political appointments. It's impossible not to be. We live in a democratic society where everyone can express their views through elections, yet there are individuals who are politically appointed for 15 to 20 years. Usually, retired professors who have been good Liberals are hired. You don't need to comment, given that I have already done that for you.
The legislation states that on election day, there will be no orange, blue or red binders, no blue or red sweaters, etc. in the polling stations. However, there will be people there all day who will be supervising the election and the ballot boxes and who will be wearing clothing with the emblem or the name of the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party or the NDP.
I think the law has to change. I saw a woman wearing clothing with the Liberal Party's emblem and she wasn't even sitting in her seat. She was behind the ballot box, eating her Kentucky Fried Chicken. That shouldn't happen. I think that is even more obvious than red, blue or orange colours. I think that if we are going to focus on colour, then we should also be focussing on the party name. People aren't stupid. They will have had 53 days in order to find out who their candidates are. When they go into a polling station, they should be allowed to vote freely, without anyone attempting to influence them.
I will end on that note. Thank you for coming today. We will be speaking again.
12:45 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Mr. Godin, it is very difficult to disagree with you on the points that you have raised.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Thank you.
Before I get into my question I'll just give you another example of a horror story, which will be preventable now because you're going to be appointing returning officers.
It was a case in Saskatchewan, not in my riding but in my neighbouring riding, and it involved the returning officers telling the incumbent candidates, of course, that they had the right to suggest names of officials who were going to be clerks, DROs, and that sort of thing. They said the deadline was January 3 I think for the last election and to please have their lists in by that time. My Conservative colleague in the neighbouring riding put his list in, and I think it was just before the end of the year, so it was four or five days before the deadline. To his dismay the returning officer said, well, sorry, but all the positions are already staffed. The former MP, an NDP candidate, Lorne Nystrom, had submitted a list of names and the returning officer said he had accepted all of Mr. Nystrom's names because they had experience and had been doing this for 15 years.
This is another abuse that hopefully will be avoided by the appointment of returning officers. It lends credence to the reasons why we need merit-based appointments. So I applaud you and the Bloc and everyone who is in favour of this.
My question is specifically on an example that happened in my riding in 2004. I won by a small majority of 122 votes, and after the election the results were challenged by the candidate who finished a close second to me. It was a legitimate challenge, but it speaks to the fact that we need to clean up how we send out voter card information.
As is the case in many rural ridings, you may live in one riding but you pick up your mail in another riding, and that's exactly what happened in my case. A number of border constituents who lived in my riding actually went into Moose Jaw, which was in the neighbouring riding, to a post office box system to pick up their mail. The suggestion was that the people were picking up their mail and the voter cards they picked up said they would vote in Moose Jaw because that's where the mail was. They challenged based on the fact that many people might have voted incorrectly in the wrong riding.
It turns out that people in my riding were wise enough to know to vote where they did, but the fact is that the voter information sent to people in my riding told them they were supposed to be voting in a neighbouring riding. My local returning officers fixed this in the 2006 election. They literally went out and got the names of all the people in the border riding areas who picked up mail in Moose Jaw and sent them individual notices saying they vote here, so everything was fine.
Could that be occurring in different ridings across Canada? Do you have any plans to rectify that?
12:50 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Sir, I remember this case very well. I followed it to the hilt. As a matter of fact, that's where I spent my summer that year, following this case.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
No, I meant following the case; I did not go to Saskatchewan.
I do not recollect that those cards were wrong, either in the mailing or in the information they contained. They were mailed to the mailing address, but the information that was provided was as a result of their residential address.
I would like to tell the committee that the judge who presided in the case said the system had worked and was impeccable. That was a source of great pride to me--that the system had worked.
There was a misinterpretation by some candidates because the mailing address was in the other riding. That was a misconception that was not borne out. There were 285--I remember that number--of those who were residing in your riding getting the mail in the other riding.