Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 19th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Good morning, colleagues.

Let's proceed with our meeting this morning. We will be discussing the main estimates of the Chief Electoral Office.

I would like to advise members that this meeting is being held in public.

I would like to also suggest that if time permits, members remember that a draft report was tabled at the last meeting regarding private members' business. If we have time, we'll deal with that at the end of this meeting. If not, we will obviously have to defer it to the next meeting.

Colleagues, we are dealing with the Chief Electoral Office during the first hour of this meeting. For the second hour we have the Commissioner of Elections appearing before us. Clearly we do not have to finish this estimates discussion. We can have the Chief Electoral Officer back at another time, should we feel that we need more time.

You have been provided with the estimates page from the blue book for this morning's discussions. As well, some notes from Mr. Mayrand were circulated this morning.

I would like to introduce Mr. Mayrand.

Thank you very much for coming this morning. Please introduce yourself and the officials you brought with you today.

Thank you.

[Marc Mayrand, Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'm really pleased to appear before you today to discuss our main estimates for 2007-08. I'm accompanied today by Mrs. Diane Davidson, the Deputy Chief Electoral Officer; Ms. Janice Vézina, senior director of financial matters, audit, and corporate services; and Mr. Rennie Molnar, the senior director for operations, register, and geography.

Before I launch into my formal notes, which were distributed, I thought I would share some observations following 60 days on the job now. As you will recall, on February 20 I appeared for the first time before this committee. Following unanimous endorsement by you and by the House a few days later, I started in the position.

It's been a very busy two months, but also fascinating, I must say. I met with my predecessor on two occasions. He had the generosity to share his wisdom and hindsight on the electoral process. I also spent a day with my counterpart for Ontario, the chief electoral officer there. I met with his team to discuss matters of mutual interest. I was also a guest of Mr. Blanchet in Quebec for polling day, where I had the opportunity to observe the quartiers généraux and visit returning officers in polling locations to observe directly the unfolding of the election on that day.

I also took time to visit all staff at Elections Canada, introduce myself, and learn more about what their challenges were. I was struck by their commitment, professionalism, and dedication to do the right things and to do things right.

I also hosted two foreign delegations, one from the political parties of Morocco, which spent the day with us discussing matters of mutual interest. I also hosted a delegation from the Australian election commission. We had the opportunity to discuss matters of mutual interest, but especially STV, which is a new method provided by the bill for the appointment of senators.

I also attended several new Canadian forum sessions, where I had the opportunity to speak briefly about democracy and the electoral process. I spent 45 minutes in a question and answer session with participants at those forums. Each time I came out lifted by the quality of la relève and confident that the future of this country will be in good hands—I can assure you of that.

I also attended a meeting of first nations aboriginal youth with Mr. Phil Fontaine to discuss matters of interest on the electoral process, and more specifically participation of first nations people in the election process.

I met with the new returning officers who have been in training in preparation for a possible electoral event. I met with many assistant returning officers who were also in training; the field liaison officers who are set across the country to support returning officers; as well as the commissioner, staff, and a group of investigators he employs to carry on his responsibilities.

Throughout this I learned much about the institution itself and spent much time learning about the electoral process and the machinery of elections. At the same time, I made the decisions required to ensure that Elections Canada is ready to conduct an election whenever it's called.

After those 60 days, I can report that I've developed a strong feeling and sense of responsibility and accountability for Elections Canada. I have also developed an unabated enthusiasm for and commitment to the position. I have not had a chance to call a meeting yet of the advisory committee of political parties, but I plan to do so some time in June. Part of the agenda we'll propose will be to discuss the workings of the committee, its governance, mutual expectations, and how we can move forward in our future discussion.

Now, going back to the main estimates and my formal presentation, as you know, my office is funded by two separate budget authorities: an annual appropriation, which is called vote 15, that provides for the salary of permanent, full-time staff; and a statutory authority that funds all other Elections Canada expenditures. Vote 15, which is the component of our budget that you are considering today, amounts to $21.8 million. Again, this represents the salaries of some 330 full-time employees.

For its part, the statutory authority, which is a direct draw from the CRF, ensures that Elections Canada has the capacity to be ready at all times to conduct an electoral event. It also recognizes that Elections Canada's independence is critical to maintaining the integrity of the democratic process.

Of course, the estimates under the statutory budget authority for which I am accountable vary from one fiscal year to the next, reflecting the particular activities of the office. This includes the conduct of elections by election referendums, as well as support for the decennial redistribution of electoral districts.

Two other budget authorities are also statutory. The first is my salary as Chief Electoral Officer, and the second is the funding required for contributions to employee benefit plans. The statutory authority is essential to fund all the functions and duties related to the effective delivery of election and referenda. This is particularly relevant in the current situation when a second consecutive government has been elected for the first time in 40 years and only the second time in our history. This situation requires Elections Canada to continuously maintain a high state of readiness.

Just as it is impossible to predict the timing of an election, it is impossible to identify every exceptional circumstance that could arise during an election. Here the statutory draw is also essential, complementing the power under section 17 of the act to adopt the legislation.

The budget under the statutory authority of 2007-08 is $82.6 million. Including the annual appropriation, the total budget for Elections Canada will be $104.4 million.

The major items in our 2007-08 estimates, in addition to the salaries of permanent employees, include: political financing, including allowances to political parties, to the extent of $30.8 million, $28 million plus a bit more for the allowance; the information technology program, at $21.9 million; the national register of electors, at $8.6 million; public education and information programs, at $7.4 million; and employee benefit plans, at $4 million.

There is also another item for event readiness activities, at $1.7 million. As well, totalling some $8.2 million are other ongoing costs that essentially cover the salaries of terms and casual employees, temporary help, professional services, and other related matters.

Our preliminary estimated cost for the 40th general election, if it were called now, is some $219 million. We would have to add an estimated amount of $56 million to include the reimbursement of election expenses to Canada's political parties. This will bring the total cost of the election to $275 million, compared to $273 million for the previous election.

I'm happy to report that Elections Canada is ready to conduct a general election whenever it is called. Since December 2006, when the responsibility for appointing and dismissing returning officers was transferred to the Chief Electoral Officer, all three of the 2008 returning officers have been appointed, and their training will be completed by the end of the day tomorrow.

Meanwhile, we have had a small number of resignations. To address the gap, we have appointed and trained new returning officers from a pool of qualified candidates set in the earlier competition process. Currently we have three vacancies, and as provided for in the act, assistant returning officers are now currently assuming their duties until proper competitions can be conducted.

Since the 39th general election, returning officers have completed more than 20% of pre-event assignments. For example, they've located suitable offices across the country, assessed the accessibility of polling stations, identified key personnel to hire once the writ is dropped, and trained community relations officers. In addition, returning officers have planned how they will conduct target revision in their electoral districts, and they have made revisions to some 10,000 polling divisions, 800 mobile polls, and over 2,000 advance polling districts. These revisions were carried out in consultation with members of Parliament and local riding associations. In fact, revised maps and geographic documents reflecting these changes were distributed to registered parties and MPs last week.

During this fiscal year, Elections Canada will continue its preparations to ensure that all resources can be quickly mobilized at the start of an electoral event. We also continue to update the national register of electors. The quality of the register is measured in terms of both the coverage—the percentage of electors on the list—and the currency of the information on the list.

Our coverage target for the registry is 92% for coverage and 77% for currency. As of April 1, 2007, the estimated quality of the register resulting from various quality assessments showed the registry is meeting the 92% standard of national coverage and is in fact exceeding by 7% the currency target.

In 2007-08 we will continue to identify opportunities to further improve the quality of the list of electors, both in coverage and currency and in voter registration services. In fact, with the help of returning officers, we plan to improve the process and strategies to reduce the incidence of non-residential addresses in the register. We have developed an elector quality improvement system to improve incomplete and inaccurate elector records, and we will implement the generalized record linkage system developed by Statistics Canada, with the aim of improving record-matching and identifying electors' records to be included in mailings.

Since 2003-2004, my office has been the subject of annual financial audits by the Auditor General. Her reports have indicated that the transactions she has reviewed are in all significant respects in accordance with the legislative provisions of the Financial Administration Act as well as with the statutes administered by my office.

In addition, at the request of my predecessor, the Auditor General conducted a performance audit of Elections Canada resources, which was completed in the fall of 2005. While the Auditor General indicated some areas for improvement , she made many positive observations, citing the agency's ability to effectively plan, manage and administer the federal electoral process, and the key role it plays in supporting the fairness and transparency of elections.

To quote from her report briefly:

[Elections Canada] delivers a number of public education and information programs aimed at enhancing the understanding of the federal electoral process and increasing the participation rate of targeted groups of electors. We found that Elections Canada works effectively with Parliament and other stakeholders to identify ways of improving the electoral process.

As reported last year, Elections Canada acted promptly on the recommendations made by the Auditor General in her 2005 report. A number of priorities outlined in our current Report on Plans and Priorities follow up on her recommendations.

I would like to touch briefly on three other areas that will be priorities for Elections Canada. They were also the focus of my first appearance, on March 22, before the Advisory Panel for Funding and Oversight of Officers of Parliament, which is chaired by the Speaker of the House.

The first area is information technology. Elections Canada has an urgent need to renew its IT infrastructure to keep pace with evolving technologies and to use the new technologies in order to better meet the needs of Canadians and the requirements often arising from electoral reforms. Our hardware and software are aging, implementing changes is becoming difficult and we need to be in a position to offer more electronic services. Renewing our IT infrastructure will ensure that we are able to continue delivering electoral events efficiently. And it will enable us to respond effectively to our future needs and those of our stakeholders, including the need to respond to legislative change. We cannot afford to delay this process.

Our information technology renewal project began last year, and will continue into next. This year, our focus will be on replacing hardware and software. This involves some 4,000 computers, in every constituency, as well as the servers and all the technological equipment that the offices of returning officers need.

More than just replacing the equipment, we also want to create a new simplified infrastructure that takes full advantage of modern information and communications technologies to provide improved business capacity, maintain the reliability expected by our users and meet our requirements for the coming decade.

The second priority is performance measurement. The Auditor General noted that while Elections Canada has the core elements of a good performance measurement and reporting framework, it lacks performance targets and indicators for some of its key activities. I consider performance measurement indicators are an important, no, an essential part of my accountability. So we will get to work on establishing an updated performance framework for our organization, with indicators and data that will allow us to be more accountable for our results and to give priority attention to areas where we see that variances have been greatest.

The third priority that I would like to bring to your attention deals with human resources. As I mentioned earlier, Elections Canada has 330 indeterminate employees. We also hire a significant number of term employees, consultants and temporary staff to meet the ongoing requirements of the agency and to ensure high-quality service to Canadians and political entities.

Like many federal organizations, Elections Canada faces the challenges presented by a number of retirements in the next five years, and the need to design a succession and recruitment plan so that key staff will continue to have the specialized knowledge and experience that the organization needs.

As noted in our Report on Plans and Priorities, we will finalize a master human resources plan in the coming year. Among other things, it will ensure that we have a succession plan in place to maintain our high level of service delivery. Meeting these priorites—each of which requires long-term strategic planning and focus—will be challenging given the environment in which we currently operate.

At the present time, we must be ready to conduct an election at all times, since we are in a situation of consecutive minority governments. We must also adapt to the effects of electoral reform in two directions at the same time: upwards; as we prepare for these reforms, we must always be ready to provide advice on the proposals that are put forward, and downwards; we must also be ready to analyze the effect of new legislation and to implement it.

Taken together, these challenges are hindering our ability to implement the recommendations of the Auditor General in the most diligent way. They also affect our ability to meet the statutory obligations and stakeholder requirements when, or as diligently as, we would like. As long as we must keep our attention on the shifting realities of the present, we cannot put adequate focus on longer-term priorities. This is why, in the next few weeks, I will be submitting a proposal for additional resources to Treasury Board. This is in order to improve the capacity of the organization to better deal with the various immediate pressures that the organization finds itself under, including the need to improve long-term planning and maintain the viability of the organization into the future. This proposal will be made to the parliamentary oversight panel a little later this spring.

This concludes my presentation. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

Colleagues, we're going to start our rounds in the normal fashion. I would encourage folks to be very focused in their questioning. We can probably get two rounds in if we do five-minute rounds, if that would be acceptable. And we certainly can extend this meeting if we have to, but I think we'll try five-minute rounds to begin with.

Could we have Mr. Owen first, please?

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayrand, and your colleagues. Let me first say congratulations to Elections Canada for the fine reputation it has within the country, but also globally. Congratulations to you for the very rapid way in which you familiarized yourself with the operations of the office and the responsibilities, including your meetings with stakeholders.

I will be focused, but I won't necessarily be short. I had three particular questions that I wanted to put to you. One is with respect to the very hard-won and honoured high reputation of Elections Canada around the world. Your predecessor, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, developed a reputation for Elections Canada as an advisor in situations of emerging democracies, helping create electoral commissions, overseeing the registration of voters, and then monitoring the elections themselves.

With respect to the estimates, I'm wondering, first of all, whether this is a practice that you favour and would like to continue, and if so, and in any event, where the funding for this type of activity shows up in the estimates. Is it from specific CIDA allocations, or is it something within your internal budget?

The second question is with respect to your meeting with the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, which, I was very pleased to see, was one of your first meetings.

In the discussions around the bill concerning voter identification, which went to the Senate and actually is now back in the House—some of our major concerns were the lack of registration of people in first nations communities; their voter ID; and the status cards, which, although they have a picture, don't have an address. I wonder if that's something you have taken up or will take up with the national chief to ensure that, at the band level at least, the cards are improved to include the address if it's on reserve or wherever, or if, at least through the band management, letters confirming the address could be made readily available. That could perhaps also assist in encouraging a greater percentage of registration, simply through that process of familiarity.

The third point was with regard to your mention of electoral reform. With respect to that, have you or your colleagues had the opportunity to review the Law Commission of Canada's report of the spring of 2004, which recommends to the Government of Canada a mixed member proportional electoral system? Anyone I have encountered who has considered that report understands it to be one of the most thorough pieces of research on public consultation in the Commonwealth. Is that something you're preparing for as we go forward, at the provincial level and possibly at the federal level, with electoral reform?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Two minutes.

[Marc Mayrand]

First, regarding the international missions, we have completed the missions for Iraq and Haiti at this point in time, and there is no ongoing mission. Those missions are generally funded outside of Elections Canada, either by CIDA, DFAIT, or other international organizations. My plan, certainly as the needs arise or the requests come, is to consider them, given the priorities of the organization at the time, but certainly to seek to foster the branding of Canada around the world through our electoral process.

With respect to first nations, there are a number of initiatives that are taking place to assist and foster greater registration among first nations. We have a number of community relations officers who provide information and facilitate the process for registration. We also use elders and youth in the community to reach out to first nations.

As for the requirements under Bill C-31, I think I did forward a letter to the chair of the committee regarding identification pieces. I understand the matter is still before the Senate, and I'm sure the matter will be raised in due course when it is discussed there.

As for electoral reform, I must admit I'm not familiar with the Law Reform Commission.... I understand, and I think we all understand, that many provinces are looking at alternatives, and we expect to have maybe two provincial referendums on these matters in the coming years. I also understand that the government has launched a process to have public consultations on the democratic process and democratic reform. I am not privy to those consultations, but I'm certainly looking forward to the outcomes and the proposals that will be coming through that process.

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I have to say I'm very impressed. That was lots of answers to lots of questions, and on time.

I'm not going to restrict anybody's questions, but I would just remind colleagues that today we're trying to focus on the estimates. We can have the CEO back at any time to discuss other issues.

Mr. Lukiwski, for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you.

I also have three questions, Mr. Mayrand. I'll try to get through them quickly.

The first is contained in your report, the section talking about appointing returning officers, now that it's within the power of Elections Canada. I'd like to get you to expand on that a little bit and tell me how that process went, your experiences, any improvements you think you might be able to entertain for future appointments, and specifically what the cost factor was to complete your process.

The second question deals with coverage and currency targets, if you can just verify that a little bit for me. It seems extraordinarily high. I'm very pleased to see that, that you have the currency and coverage targets basically at or above what you anticipated. I'd like to get a little bit more explanation on how that was accomplished, because if it's true, then I think we're in pretty good shape.

Lastly, could we get a status update on your information technology renewal project? I understand from the last time you appeared before a committee that I also sit on, the oversight committee, that you had some serious concerns there. I understand that you really need to upgrade your software and hardware capabilities to be totally ready for another election, and I hope to get an update on where that stands right now.

[Marc Mayrand]

With regard to the appointment of returning officers, which, again, is based on merit, basically what was done at the time was that we reviewed all the returning officers and consulted with MPs as to whether they had any views on the returning officers. As provided by the act, as a result of those consultations, 190 of those returning officers were reappointed without competition. They were already in place.

We had to run a competition across the country for 118 returning officers. In order to do that, we published in the media, through various forms, notification of positions being available. We set up boards in each of the ridings to assess candidates, who had to go through a merit process that consisted of work at home, a written exam, as well as an interview. The board consisted of an expert on HR matters, as well as two field liaison officers. Their recommendations were put forward and resulted in the various nominations that all members have been apprised of. In fact, all the appointments are posted on the website.

The cost was $1.4 million for the whole exercise. We had more than 3,000 applicants for those positions across the country. In terms of an improvement, we are in the process of conducting a post-mortem and looking at what we could do better in the future.

In terms of the coverage and currency of the registry, basically we did a test with 30,000 random electors on the registry to validate the information we had on them. We conducted phone interviews, and that's how we came, essentially, to the figures I have tabled today. It's an exercise that we plan to run on a regular basis, at least a yearly basis, so that we continue to track and over time be more comfortable with the figures we're seeing.

In terms of the IT status, I think that's a development since I last appeared before the panel. We have now a request for proposals that has been posted on MERX calling for submissions. We are confident that we will meet the deadlines we've set for ourselves of having the hardware renewed by the end of July.

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

With your RFP for IT improvements, will you be on budget?

[Marc Mayrand]

Well, we certainly—

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

We won't know until the end, but I mean, with your RFPs that you've submitted, you're still confident—

[Marc Mayrand]

At this point in time, yes, but we'll have to see what proposals we get from the potential bidders on this, plus we will have to negotiate the terms of the contracts, because there are a number of options in the contract.

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

What is the deadline again for completion of the RFP?

[Marc Mayrand]

It's by the end of July. By August 1, we hope to have a contract in place.

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

All right. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, Mr. Lukiwski.

Monsieur Guimond, five minutes.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You have indicated that our questions should be on the estimates. As I have always been a bit difficult, I am declaring that my questions are not on the estimates. However old I get, I have always acted a bit like a teenager, and my father grouses about it to this day.

So in the same spirit of being difficult, Mr. Meyrand, I was almost thinking that your new job had made you forget your knowledge of French, given the length of your presentation in English compared to the one in French. Witnesses have the right to speak the language of their choice, but your predecessor's presentations were mostly 50% English and 50% French. I kept track: you spoke in English for 16 minutes and in French for 8 minutes. I suspect that my colleague Ms. Picard could say the same. I don't want to speak for my francophone colleagues from the Liberal Party, Mr. Proulx and Ms. Robillard. But I am sure that we were happy to see that you kept your French. Ms. Davidson will tell you how miserable I can get. She knows.

Back to your presentation. You say that since December 12, 2006, you have appointed 308 returning officers. Since this is a public document, would it be possible to provide the clerk with a table containing the 308 names? In fact, there are 305, since three positions are vacant. I would like to know which returning officers were already appointed, and which were appointed under the new regime. The Bloc Québecois is very pleased that Bill C-2guarantees an open and transparent process in this area. Could you send us the information as soon as possible?

[Marc Mayrand]

Absolutely, that shouldn't be a problem. The web site has a lot of information on the subject, but I can certainly send you a table showing those who are continuing in the job and—

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Right, those who are continuing in the job and the new ones.

On the same page, you say that since the last election, returning officers have completed twenty or so pre-election tasks. For example, they have found suitable offices. In my view, the idea of suitable is subjective by definition. Something suitable for you may perhaps not be for me. You may find that a $300,000 house is suitable, but if you are a hockey or baseball player, you could feel that a $300,000 house is not suitable. So would you agree with me that the meaning of the word is subjective?

This has been a great source of discontent in the past. I even invited Mr. Kingsley and Ms. Davidson to come to Saint-Laurent on the Île d'Orléans to see a hockey changing room where six voting booths had been made with screens. As the MP, I walked around the room, and I could see the people who were voting for me and those who were voting for someone else. On election day, the act allows candidates to come into polling stations. You do not get in the way of the voting procedure, but you shake hands with the election workers and the people standing in line. I saw people voting for me and against me in a hockey changing room where there were six booths.

Mr. Kingsley and Ms. Davidson came to see that polling station and found it to be totally unacceptable. So much for the definition of the word “suitable”. As an official candidate in the next election—and all my colleagues will agree with me on this—I expect that our returning officer will bring party representatives together to tell them where voting will take place. But he should be ready to be told about things that don't make any sense—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I'm sorry, Monsieur Guimond, time is up on that round.

I really have no objections if you use your five minutes for whatever you want, but I would just like to remind members, out of respect, that Monsieur Mayrand has spent a number of hours, I'm sure, preparing for discussion on the estimates. I'm knowledgeable that the team has offered to come back at any time this committee would like to invite them back; we can have any discussion on any subject. That would be fine, I'm sure, with all colleagues. However, today we're discussing the estimates and the spending of taxpayers' dollars. If we have questions that are in relation to that subject, I have five minutes available to any colleague who wants to discuss those.

Ms. Davies is up next, and then Madame Robillard. Thank you.

Ms. Davies.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Chairperson.

First of all, I'd like to request that the letter the CEO referred to about the voter ID, which he sent to you as the chair, be made available. Could I get a copy of it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Yes. It is circulated. Do you have it in your package?

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

No.