Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2007

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Mr. Chairman, the selection criteria for evaluating the performance of returning officers and for determining whether they should keep their jobs or not were tabled with the Speaker of the House on December 12 or 13. I think that he recently made them public, because there was a loss at a certain point.

The criteria were set by Elections Canada and they are based on our understanding of the returning officer's role. It is important to be politically impartial and to be able to manage a group comprised of x number of persons. In fact, 500 or 600 persons are hired for one day and they need training. The returning officer is also in charge of an office with about 30 people. He must have an understanding of human resources.

Elections Canada developed its process for selecting returning officers before the adoption of Bill C-2. We wrote to every political party leader and we asked them for their advice regarding returning officers.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Excuse me.

Mr. Chairman, we have trouble hearing because people around us are talking.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

We received all the advice from each party. Each time a party asked us to put someone through a competition, we complied. Elections Canada also had a word in this, because the performance of some returning officers was not up to the normal expectations of Canadians.

Ultimately, more than 60% of the returning officers kept their jobs after their merits were evaluated by our system. They respected basic principles, and their performance varied from very satisfactory to satisfactory. As soon as the legislation was adopted, we put ads in the newspapers to fill the remaining 40% of the positions. We also advertised on some radio stations and on the Elections Canada website, as well as other links to the Elections Canada's website. We received more than 2,000 applications for 115 or so available positions.

The management and evaluation of candidates for each returning officer position was done by a selection committee chaired by the liaison officer in charge and comprised a liaison officer from neighbouring ridings and a human resources management consultant hired from the private sector. The latter was not an employee of Elections Canada. All these persons had the benefit of a training session given by Elections Canada, while waiting for this part of the legislation to be adopted. You might say that I was overly optimistic; let me answer that I was extremely hopeful.

We managed all these competitions so that all the new returning officers, namely about 40% of the entire group of officers, could be on the job on March 1^st after receiving six days of training for March 1^st. As a matter of fact, the training is going on right now. It will all be done in two months and a few days after Bill C-2 is passed.

The governor in council accepted the recommendation that February 10 should be the day on which the new returning officers begin their work, and the former officers will leave as the new ones are appointed. Some of the new positions will not be filled, because people are still resigning. Some people accepted their appointment but then changed their minds for various reasons. Change is a part of human nature.

That is where things stand at the moment.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I can only congratulate you for implementing this process. I knew that you had been asking for it for a long time and that you wanted to have it as much as we did. Congratulations!

I wish you good luck in your new career. I think that we will miss you.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, Madame Picard.

Mr. Dewar, did you want to...? You have the floor, and then Mr. Reid.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I too would like to thank you, not only for the work you've done in your capacity as Chief Electoral Officer but also for your work before that as a public servant. Those of us who are from Ottawa will know you have worked in the public service for quite a while and have done stellar work. I've always been impressed by that, and I say that not only on behalf of the people in my party but also, I think, on behalf of the people in Ottawa in general.

I also know the work you've done internationally is well known. My brother happened to be in the former Yugoslavia and got to know people in the international community. He was part of the NDI group that went over there. Your name has been well noted in the international community, so I'm glad to see you'll be moving on to a global stage. I hope we'll be able to support you in any way we can, because I think it is important.

The next step for Canada to take is to help build strong democratic frameworks in the rest of the world. I think that really is our role.

I wish you well. We will miss you. Personally, I would have hoped you would have been around for a little longer, with a couple of things we're dealing with.

I would like to touch on a couple of things, and that has to do with Bill C-31. You had mentioned to my colleague.... I was just talking to Mr. Godin about the concerns raised with birthdate information. I will be very specific.

When I wrote to the Privacy Commissioner on this--and she wrote me back last week--she stated the following. I'd just like your take on it.

Is the problem of voter fraud so serious and sufficiently widespread to require the use of additional personal information?

That's the first thing. And we talked about having voter identifiers. I think you mentioned to Mr. Godin that it might be helpful to have the year of birth. But she then says that if it is a serious problem.... Do we have a problem here? That's her first point. And,

If it is a serious problem, is it necessary to provide polling clerks with the date of birth or can the same objective be achieved using less detailed information?

To this, I think you would say yes.

In light of what the bill--it's gone through the House, now it's going to the Senate--has in it, amended, with date of birth information to be available to all polling clerks but also to be shared with all political parties, is it your fervent belief that was the right tool to use to deal with voter fraud? I should say potential voter fraud, because we've heard from you there were only four cases in the last three elections that we're aware of. I believe we've gone too far with it, in terms of the use of personal information. But what would suffice, in your estimation?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

To begin with, thank you very much for those comments about the international scene.

I should mention, by the way, that NDI is the National Democratic Institute, which is also Washington-based. Probably half its staff is Canadian. There is a large contingent of Canadians. IFES works with them and sometimes competes with them, depending on the nature of the project. So they're partners and competitors at the same time.

With respect to my views about the date or year of birth, I already gave that advice when I made the recommendation that year of birth was what I was recommending, as opposed to date of birth. I haven't seen sufficient reason to step away from that, especially in light of the risks involved.

But frankly, as I said earlier, it's really in the hands of the committee and Parliament to decide what the best balance is in terms of what is required.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

On the concerns about administration, getting all this information collected, ensuring--as I mentioned to Ms. Stoddart--that this is kept private, we've had that debate, and wiser minds prevailed, apparently. But if we look at the concerns around address information being given at the polls, are you not deeply concerned about people being turned away, and then--I've heard this from a couple of people--challenging the validity of an outcome?

If you have people who go to the polls and are sent home.... And thank goodness we don't have to walk two days and be sent home, because what would happen? If people are sent home, they then challenge their right to vote or you end up with a situation where people, at whatever time the polls close.... Let's say it's 7:30, and the polls close at 8 o'clock. They go home, get their ID, come back, and the door is shut. We could be running into a major challenge of one's right to vote.

I'm wondering if you've thought that through in terms of contingencies and how to deal with them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I'm sorry, but—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

That was my last question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

We're over time on that one, Mr. Dewar. I do think that question was already answered. Unfortunately, Mr. Dewar, you weren't here at the beginning of the meeting. We will have time for another round at the end if you want to ask that question again.

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Certainly.

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

Quite frankly, I'm not sure if this is a point of order or not, but it might be helpful for the committee.

Mr. Dewar had mentioned he'd received a letter from the Privacy Commissioner. I just wonder if he would be willing to table that, so that the committee would be able to—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Of course. I would be delighted, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

We're going to enter our third round, colleagues. We do seem to be doing very well, but we'll try to keep it to three minutes, which is the standard practice.

I only have one name on my list. If anybody else wants to get on, just raise your hand.

Mr. Reid, please.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

We're down to three minutes, are we?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I think we can go with that. Or is everybody okay with five? He's my last questioner.

Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you.

First of all, Mr. Kingsley, let me add my voice to those of all the others who have offered you their congratulations on what sounds like a very interesting new posting, and my thanks as well for your very long service to the country.

I'm glad you brought up the “walk in the snow” analogy, because a thought occurred to me when you were mentioning the number of years of service. When Pierre Trudeau resigned, just by coincidence he had served one day longer than Sir Wilfrid Laurier. These things happen sometimes. I suspect you've served slightly longer than either of them, actually, for which we are very grateful.

I had come here with a—

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

You know the brief on the Liberals. I'm impressed.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

That's right. If I had lived in Laurier's day, I probably would have been voting Liberal.

I had actually come with a series of questions regarding the appointment of the new returning officers, but partly through your conversation with Madame Picard and partly through a press release you put out last Friday, you dealt with the question by saying everything will be in place by March 1. That's very much appreciated, and it certainly puts my mind very much at ease.

I did want to ask you another question that came out of your conversation with Mr. Dewar, and that's the question on the time at which the polls close. For a number of years now, we've had an experiment in which the polls close at different times in different parts of the country. It means that the ability of people to vote at an hour that is convenient for them will obviously vary from one part of the country to the other.

You must have had a considerable amount of feedback from across the country as to how well or how poorly that works. I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say with regard to the question of whether or not the current regime works well. If it doesn't, how might voting hours be appropriately adjusted?

In asking this, I know there was another policy consideration when the law was put in place, but I'm really thinking of the accessibility of the franchise to voters on voting day, as an issue in and of itself.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

Thank you for the personal comments that you made. I really appreciate them.

With respect to staggered voting hours, which is how we have come to refer to them, I can't remember having received a complaint from a Canadian asking why the polls are open from 7:30 to 7:30 in their riding, but next door or out east it's from 9:30 until 9:30. I haven't gotten that. One must remember that they're still open for twelve hours during the day across the land.

I can't remember.... There may have been some, but I think they would have stuck with me, so it would seem not. I can't remember getting a lot of congratulations either for the fact that Parliament changed that law. The complaints thing is something that drives us, obviously, and I can't recollect that there was anything at all equivalent to a movement of anything.