Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 19th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

We will certainly get you that copy.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay.

First of all, congratulations on your appointment. It's a pleasure to meet you. Thank you for coming to the committee today.

I have a couple of questions related to the estimates in terms of where the priorities are. Having listened to your presentation, where you talked about performance targets, I am very concerned. Elections Canada, overall, is a terrific organization. You have, as has been said, an incredible reputation both nationally and internationally. But I have concerns about performance targets and making sure the system we have is based on real voter accessibility for all people, based on their socio-economic indicators.

I too have a question about Bill C-31. It has gone through the House. The former CEO has been quoted in the press as estimating that up to 5% of the voters who show up at the polls could possibly lose the right to vote because of these new rules. You have mentioned briefly this new voter ID that will be required, and I know you met with representatives in the aboriginal community. But to me it is a given that of course Elections Canada will strive to make sure that people are registered. Maybe for 80% of the population that's a very easy thing to do, through income tax filing or through public announcements. But it's that last 10% or 15% or 20% of people who, for various reasons—they don't have addresses, they are homeless, they don't have ID, or they move around a lot—are the most difficult to get.

When you talk about performance targets, I'd like to know whether they include this, because I am very concerned that under this new, rigid requirement for voter identification there will be many people who lose the right to vote. I would like to know what Elections Canada intends to do to ensure that doesn't happen, and if someone hasn't been registered, to make your best effort to register them for sure.

When it still hasn't happened, what will happen on election day or in advance polls when those people show up and have to go through this ridiculous vouching system, where we have to find another person in the same poll who is registered and who has the right ID to vouch for one other person? It's going to create havoc in communities such as mine, in Vancouver East.

That is one question I'd like you to respond to.

This is the second one. It took me a long time to twig to the fact that there's systemic discrimination, I believe, in the way we do election spending, in that the election spending for each riding is based on the registered voters list. To take two ridings in Vancouver—Vancouver Quadra, which is a very affluent riding, and my riding, Vancouver East—the former probably has the highest number of voters in Vancouver and I probably have the lowest. Because our electoral spending is based on that—It's level for all the parties within that riding, which is good—it would be terrible if it weren't, so I agree with that—but, for example, my spending limit could be $20,000 less than that of some of my colleagues in other ridings.

It comes back to this question of who's on the voters list. It's taken me years to realize that it actually is a systemic issue that even impacts the level of election spending that can take place from riding to riding, which can produce huge variations.

I don't know whether you're aware of this or whether you have any suggestions about how to deal with it, but it may be something that requires an amendment at some point. It is systemic discrimination that exists within the system.

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I do not think that there can be a lot of time left for the Chief Electoral Officer to reply. I am going to try to use up the five remaining minutes so that he can't answer, just like you did not let him answer me a little earlier.

I would like him to tell us where in the estimates the specific case of Vancouver East is to be found. I keep going through the estimates, and I cannot find any mention of the homeless vote in Vancouver East.

You told us that questions should preferably be on the estimates. You saw what I did with your recommendation. So—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Go ahead, Monsieur Guimond.

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

Excuse me, Libby. Don't take this personally against you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Excuse me. I'm just going to interrupt. I think we're getting a little off course here on what our intentions are today.

Madam Davies, you have 30 seconds left in your round. I know you did premise it with—

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I linked it to the performance targets the CEO raised.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Do you know what? I'm happy to allow colleagues to talk about whatever they want. You've got your five minutes and you've got 30 seconds left for an answer.

Go ahead, Monsieur Mayrand, for 30 seconds, please.

[Marc Mayrand]

We do have a range of programs to reach out to various groups, one group certainly being homeless individuals across the country. We try to facilitate registration and make it accessible for them, as well as to provide them, through community relation officers, with the information they need to exercise their right to vote.

On the matter of Bill C-31 and the 5% figure, I would just point out that this 5% is coming from an assessment done in Toronto on a municipal election that had ID requirements. We found out there, after a discussion with the municipality, that they estimated up to 5% of electors did not necessarily have the ID pieces required—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you. We're going to have to stop there. I allowed that to go over by 30 seconds.

Madame Robillard, you're up next.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

It is five minutes again. I'm hoping to get a five-minute round in one more time for folks, so let's try to stay focused. Thank you.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Good morning, Mr. Mayrand. Good morning to all your team.

I am looking at your budgeted expenditures. If I set aside election expenses, I see that most of the amounts in the main estimates are for staff. You have $21 million for employees, plus $4 million for contributions to their benefits, which makes a total of $25 million. You say that you have 330 full-time employees. I would like a much more detailed breakdown.

I understand that you are going to develop a human resources plan for next year, but are you able to tell me how many employees will be retiring in the next five years? What is your staff profile? How many bilingual positions do you presently have? Do you have any problems on that front?

Turning to employee training, what part of the budget do you devote to that each year? What about the mentoring of your employees, what about their career planning, their mobility? Is your staff representative? How many men and how many women do you have. There was a very concrete plan to have visible minorities all through the public service. I know that you represent a government-mandated agency.

Can you tell us about your employees?

[Marc Mayrand]

I am happy to give you a full answer by sending you more complete information, but I can assure you that, in general, Elections Canada meets the visible minority requirement according to the standards established by the commission and Treasury Board.

I should also mention that we have to comply with the same requirements to report on these matters to central agencies. I would be happy to send you those reports, and any other information you would like to have.

As regards the balance between men and women, I do not have the exact percentages, so I do not want to mislead you. But I think the situation at Elections Canada compares favourably to almost all similar organizations. The same applies to our linguistic profile.

I will send you more precise data on the subject with pleasure, that is to say, I will send you the organization's current demographic profile.

This is actually one of the priorities I identified in my proposals today. We need a human resources plan that is more current and more attuned to the needs of the organization especially for the next five or six years in the light of a likely retirement rate of from 7% to 8%. Clearly, the people most likely to leave are those with most experience, which creates an urgent need to establish development programs for those who are going to be taking over when the time comes.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

What is your employee training budget?

[Marc Mayrand]

It is $500,000.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Has it gone up over the years? Have you had to respond negatively to any employee's training requests because you do not have the budget?

[Marc Mayrand]

No, these requests are dealt with according to the organization's operational needs. But it seems to me that we have a very generous policy whose goal is to encourage our employees' professional development.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Did your staff take part in the last survey on employee satisfaction in the public service? If so, what were the results in your organization?

[Marc Mayrand]

I know that they took part. I have not had the chance to become familiar with the results, but I can send them to you as well.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I think that this survey, which was done throughout the public service several years ago, should be required reading for senior managers and the chief executive officer, so that they know what the staff is feeling. We know perfectly well that when employees are happy in an organization, they are even more productive. Sometimes, we let ourselves get carried away with the organization's mission, and we forget the welfare of our employees. It happens everywhere.

I strongly encourage you to become familiar with it. I am interested in doing so too.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much. That round is over.

Mr. Reid, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you.

Welcome to our committee, Monsieur Mayrand.

I wonder if I could just start by asking you to finish the comments you were making in response to Ms. Davies about the 5%. You got partway through it and ran out of time.

[Marc Mayrand]

Basically, that's based on the City of Toronto's municipal election. We looked at the number of people who did not meet the ID requirements during that election. One other thing we have to keep in mind is that it is a very large, densely populated urban area. I think we have to be careful as to how we could extrapolate across the country on this matter.

I'm not sure—

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

That's all I wanted. You were cut off midway through. To be honest, I thought there was a bit of bombast in the question, but the answer sounded very factual. But you were the one who was cut off, so I just wanted to provide a chance to get that.

I wanted to ask two questions relating to the issue of voter fraud. I realize this is not the subject of your comments today, but you are here. On the list you provided of ID, some of the ID that's there I think makes perfect sense. Some might be alarmed if they weren't there. But there are some examples that I would be concerned about having remain on this list, based on my discussions with people who have been witness to voter fraud. I'm not really in a position to go through it exhaustively, but if we were to bring examples to your attention, perhaps by bringing individuals to this committee who could cite examples from previous elections, would you then have an openness to potentially removing pieces or having phrasing for some pieces—?