Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Sept. 13th, 2007

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

Prior to your appointment, Ms. Davidson always accompanied Mr. Kingsley. Do Elections Canada records show that this matter was discussed, if not by you, then by Mr. Kingsley or by an Elections Canada representative appearing before this committee?

[Marc Mayrand]

Not during the study of Bill C-31

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

I see.

According to media reports, when you appeared before the Senate committee, this decision, which you had not yet made, was discussed.

[Marc Mayrand]

That is correct.

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

The circumstances were as follows: you were asked what you intended to do about veiled voters. Could you recall for our benefit how you answered the question at the time?

[Marc Mayrand]

All right. I just want to make it clear that when testimony was being given to the House committee on Bill C-31, the events that arose in connection with the Quebec provincial election had yet to occur. However, when the Senate proceeded to examine the bill, I was invited to appear along with my Quebec counterpart to specifically address the issue of individuals with face coverings. My colleague stated at that time that the legislation needed to be amended. In response to a question, I stated that under the current legislation, individuals could vote without having to uncover their face.

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

Mr. Mayrand, you say you reminded your election personnel—and I am not disputing your statement—to ask female voters to remove their face covering for identification purposes and that the choice to comply or not with this request was up to the individual.

Will individuals be asked to remove their face covering solely in the presence of women, or in the presence of any returning officer, whether male or female?

[Marc Mayrand]

I issued this reminder to election personnel pursuant to section 144 of the Act which requires confirmation of voter eligibility. As such, I asked election personnel to invite anyone whose face is concealed to uncover it in a manner that is respectful of their beliefs. We will make every reasonable effort to ensure that the voting process is respectful of the beliefs of electors.

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

So then, if a women agrees to uncover her face, but only in the presence of a woman, then her choice will be respected?

[Marc Mayrand]

We will endeavour, to the best of our ability, to put in place a process that is respectful of voters' beliefs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you. Your time is up. We went a little bit over there, but I think it was worth it.

Next on the list is Mr. Lukiwski, for seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you very much.

Good day, Mr. Mayrand. Thank you for attending.

There is a fundamental premise here that I think we need to establish. In my opinion—and please correct me if I'm wrong—you seem to be saying in many of your statements that have been quoted in recent weeks that you were only following the literal interpretation of the act, which of course in your opinion prevents you from forcing veiled women to remove their veils when approaching a voting station.

In order to establish some frame of reference here, do you not agree that the clear intent of this committee in unanimous fashion was that veils should be removed? In other words, the whole purpose of this committee's investigation, or of Bill C-31, was to ensure voter integrity, and that of course includes being able to clearly identify the face of a voter. Did you not understand that was the intent and spirit of the discussions held around this table?

[Marc Mayrand]

I have to rely on the text of the law. There were several discussions on the matter of identification of electors throughout the debate in the House and the Senate. In the last few days I reviewed all of those debates to see whether there was an intention expressed in the House or in the Senate with regard to veiled electors. I can only refer to the debate in the Senate, where the question was clearly raised, and there were no suggestions or amendments made to the legislation.

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

I'd like to get a direct answer to my question if I could. Are you saying that you did not understand the intention of this committee during its discussions on Bill C-31 that clear identification of voters should be paramount?

[Marc Mayrand]

Identification is possible in many fashions, and that's what the act provides. One is through a photo, but there are other alternatives provided in the act that do not require visual identification.

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

In your opening statement you said that you have discretionary power, should you choose to impose it—I believe it's under section 17 of the act—to ask veiled women to remove their veils. Is that not correct?

[Marc Mayrand]

It's saying that this power is extraordinary.

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

But you do have that ability, sir, is that not correct?

[Marc Mayrand]

In specific circumstances I may be able to adapt the act to ensure that the voting proceeds in a normal, orderly fashion.

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

So that is a yes, you do have that power?

[Marc Mayrand]

I have the authority, the power to adapt the act.

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

But you are saying now that you choose not to exercise that power in this particular case?

[Marc Mayrand]

As we speak, I don't see grounds to use the power.

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

Can you give me a further explanation as to why, sir? Again I go back to the fact that I think this committee has been unanimous that full voter integrity should be the paramount intent of this act. You have the power to ensure that in this particular occasion, yet you choose not to exercise that. I'm just wondering why.

[Marc Mayrand]

Sorry, I missed part of your question.