Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 27th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I agree.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

I believe that's a great recommendation.

I have five speakers left, and I'm trying to keep it to five minutes. In order to give Mr. Kingsley an appropriate time to answer, maybe we could tighten up our questions a little bit.

Five minutes, Ms. Jennings.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank you very much for your answers to my colleagues' various questions, Mr. Kingsley. I think you have clarified things to some extent.

I would like to come back to the issue regarding amendments to the act in order to give the Chief Electoral Officer the power to choose and appoint returning officers. This is a very interesting issue that deserves debate by parliamentarians. I would just like a few clarifications.

At the moment, when a returning officer is appointed by order in council, how long is the term?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Until there is a readjustment and the electoral boundaries change. If the readjustment has taken place and the electoral boundaries have not changed, the person continues in the position.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Despite the fact that the candidate's name was put forward by a member of Parliament from whatever political party, once the person is appointed, he or she is not accountable to anyone. If there are no changes in the electoral boundaries, the person could remain in the position for 30 years, according to what you say.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Some people have remained in the position for about 20 years.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I see. I would like us to correct the impression that people may have. They may think that since a member of Parliament put forward one or more names and because the individual was selected and appointed by order in council, the returning officer is automatically accountable to the member of Parliament or to future candidates from the same party. That is not the case, nor is it the case if someone has gone through all the steps in the selection process and been appointed for a 10-year period. If the term is renewable, the individual may be subject to pressure within his or her company to have the term renewed. I make this comment simply to demonstrate that there may be aberrations in both cases.

In your proposal, you say that if the amendment were accepted, the revocation should occur for the reasons set out in subsection 24(7). Do you have a copy of the act so that we can see exactly what these reasons are? Are you suggesting that a very clear revocation process, and one that is well-known to the public, be set up should the act be amended as you propose?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to answer this question at a later meeting, because this is part of Bill C-2. We are reviewing what the bill proposes. However, we can certainly tell you what is provided for in section 24.

With respect to your comments about returning officers, an example was given by another member of Parliament, who said that pressure was applied to a returning officer—for what it is worth. Personally, I'm talking about determining merit based on the real needs of the position and the perception on the part of the party that was not involved in appointing the returning officer regarding the political affiliation of the returning officer—because that is what we are talking about—and the increased likelihood that such a thing could actually happen.

With your permission, Madame Davidson will answer the question about what is in the section of the statute.

[Diane Davidson]

Subsection 24(7) cites the reasons for which a returning officer may be removed:

a) [...] for reason of illness, physical or mental disability [...]

b) fails to discharge competently a duty of a returning officer under this Act or to comply with an instruction of the Chief Electoral Officer [...]

c) fails to complete the revision of the boundaries of the polling divisions in their electoral district as instructed by the Chief Electoral Officer [...]

d) contravenes subsection (6) [knowingly engages in politically partisan conduct] [...]

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Thank you, so this already exists.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you. We appreciate that answer.

Madame Guay.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Good afternoon, Mr. Kingsley.

I can tell you that things went well in my riding as regards the returning officer. He followed the Act, he was very clear, and we were informed immediately when something was wrong. In addition, problems were solved quickly. However, I do not know whether this was the case in all ridings. In our area, things went well.

Earlier, you were saying that some returning officers had been appointed for a period of up to 20 years. However, we should remember that the electoral boundaries are readjusted every 10 years. So there are changes made to the returning officers. That is what happened in my riding. When it was split in two, we got a new returning officer. They do not necessarily hold the position for 20 years.

I have a rather particular question to ask you. In my riding, on polling day or in the advance polls, even though people had their voter card, they were required to have identification cards as well. I was even asked for this myself, even though everyone knew who I was when I went to vote.

I have nothing against this approach, but I am wondering whether it should not be followed everywhere. There cannot be one rule in one riding but not in others. The returning officer of a riding cannot decide to act in one way in one area, while a returning officer in another riding decides to act differently. This caused a problem, particularly for young people.

For example, I took my 18-year-old son to vote for the first time. He did not have his I.D. card with him, but he had his voter card. And they did not want to allow him to vote. I had to go into the polling station to identify him, to say that he was my son and that he was entitled to vote. In the end, he was allowed to vote. This is perhaps something that should be looked into.

There was another situation that I found very problematic and that I experienced during the last election campaign. I would even say that it involved a lack of respect for all voters. I am talking about candidates who run but whom no one sees throughout the entire campaign. They put signs everywhere, and journalists ran after them without ever managing to reach them. I am talking about candidates who were never in the riding, not once.

I do not know whether it might be possible to establish some requirements in this regard when we amend the Canada Elections Act. I think this displays a complete lack of respect for people, because they want to know for whom they are voting. There were signs everywhere, but generally speaking, these candidates do not even live in the riding. Their pictures are simply displayed on posts around the riding and we are criticized because we do not know where they are or who they are. I think this is a serious problem and one that shows a complete lack of respect for voters.

I would ask you to think about this matter.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

I will begin by responding to the second issue you raised, that of candidates. I'm pleased that you made that comment here because it is in this place that this issue has to be considered and I don't know that I would have a position on that. This is an issue that specifically involves this country's political life.

In terms of the identification cards, the returning officer did not have the right to do what he did. He simply did not have the right to do that.

I'm pleased that you raised that issue, because it raises a larger one. Who are the citizens in our society who generally do not carry identification cards on them? At some point, when the issue is debated, the question will have to be asked. Should people have to carry identification on them in order to vote?

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

They are often younger people.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

They are young people, aboriginals, etc. There are groups of people in our society who do not generally carry identification on them. These are people who live differently from us, and there are a fair number of them. We will need to address all those questions when we talk about identification cards.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Madame Guay, you have one minute left.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

No, I'm fine. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I have Mr. Preston next. Did you want to take 30 seconds of his time?

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Yes.

I have just a quick follow-up, Mr. Kingsley, on the appointment of returning officers. You're ready to go; you said that basically you will, as soon as royal assent has been given, and that's great.

In a minority situation, of course, we could be going to an election at any time. How long do you think, or at least how long do you hope, it would take to get all 308 or 310 returning officers appointed? Is there any kind of a timeline on that?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

I would hope to be able mount an exercise that would do it.... I hesitate because I said I wouldn't testify on Bill C-2 here, but I will say two months.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

You have four and a half minutes.

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

That's great.

Mr. Kingsley and Ms. Davidson, welcome today.

You made a point to Mr. Hawn that after it was brought to your attention you were able to purify some address lists that he had. You commended Mr. Godin for his supplying to you changes and addresses and making the list better.

Are we to take it that it is our job now to ensure that the Elections Canada list is right?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

No. With all due respect, sir, what I'm trying to say is that people have been relying solely on Elections Canada to do this, and that was not necessarily the intent initially.

By the nature of the problems that are raised here, there is definitely a need for parliamentarians to be involved in reacting to the list that is provided to them annually.