Mr. Chairman, I don't quite get the second part of the question, because I don't see the relationship between the one-in-five electors who would have to produce two pieces of documentation and perceived instances of fraud under the present system. That has me confused, quite frankly.
Perhaps I could start to answer the first question with respect to lower registration rates for persons in aboriginal communities. This is a fact of life in Canada, as it exists now. We saw at the last election that some of the measures that we have put in place are beginning to bear fruit--the Assembly of First Nations, Elections Canada, and other aboriginal communities in Elections Canada--and there was greater registration at the polls by these persons. This was discussed at this committee before.
What we do at every election, through targeted revision, is target 10% or more of the 10,500,000 residences in Canada and actually send revising agents to their door. We visited at the last election 1,400,000 residences and did what we used to call door-to-door enumeration by sending two revising agents. We identified apartment buildings with high mobility. We identified sections of cities with high mobility. We identified new developments. We identified residences where there's high turnover because people are older. We identified student residences. That's where we sent 1,400,000 visits.
We only got 232,000 persons who registered through that door-to-door visit, where we visited twice or three times. That may be an answer, by the way, about door-to-door enumeration, how successful that is now, but that is what we do. People are not answering or people are not willing to register. Now, it must be remembered that you've turned down a recommendation here. People have to produce ID at their homes to register. People have to produce the ID of a relative they wish to register. If the person is absent, gone driving, has his driver's licence, has left no ID at home, that person cannot register his spouse or her spouse. You've turned down a recommendation to make that. We would have picked up 0.6 or 0.8 more for each person we pick up through that means. With aboriginal communities, with the efforts we're deploying, I think we will have more success.
As well, I've answered the question before, and I'm sorry for taking so long, but the discussion you're having is so important. With a fixed-date election, the thought was raised here that we could do targeted enumeration or revision before the electoral process. In other words, do it even more thoroughly than we do now and have a little bit more time and have preliminary lists that have these changes in them, so that when you go door to door you will have up-to-date lists with those door-to-door visits having been completed.
You may wish to consider or reconsider whether it's necessary to have two people visit each door, whether it's necessary to have ID at the door—which was never required before when we did door-to-door enumeration in this country—whether it's necessary to have ID for people who are not there when their spouse is trying to register them. These are recommendations I made before.
With respect to your second question, perhaps I could just elaborate a little bit, and maybe that will trigger the question you had in mind.