Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 11th, 2007

[James (Jim) Quail]

If I might speak to that, just to be a little more precise, what the amendment deals with is the following scenario. Here's a typical situation: someone lives in a rural area and there isn't a street address; the municipal authority hasn't given them a number on the street they live on, but they have their postal address, say P.O. Box 18, at some post office. They get all their mail and official documents there, so their tax assessment, for example, has that address. That, under Bill C-31, would not have complied; they would not have identification for the purpose of voting.

What this says is if the address information—post office box, whatever—on the voters list coincides with the document you bring in to identify yourself, you are deemed to have complied. So the thing it fixes is--as you say, if people are on the voters list who have identification that indicates a post office box, or, as I said, general delivery or some other designation other than a civic address, they are deemed to have ID that has a civic address. And you're correct, that's all it fixes, and that's why I'm saying it does an incomplete job of fixing the problem.

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

That gentleman just agreed with my point: Bill C-18 is strictly for one situation, and that's the only thing we are looking at under Bill C-18.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, Mr. Proulx.

Again, I will try to keep members on track. I know, as simple as this bill is, it can sometimes get a bit complicated in that it is similar to other issues we're dealing with over time.

We still have this round to go. Any other speakers?

Mr. Angus, five minutes, please.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Boyko, I was interested in your perspective. We had a lot of conversation here about how we all want to encourage young people to vote. Everybody's patting themselves on the back about how much they love students and can't understand why students won't vote.

It seems to me that Bill C-18 speaks specifically to the problems students have in voting. The scenario that's being put forward is simply rural addresses. However, many people are not on the voters list, or should be on the voters list, so the question is of being able to vouch because you're not found there with proper presentation. You are saying that tens of thousands of students are not going to be able to vote. Do you believe this issue of vouching in any way, having one person appear to vouch, will address that issue?

[Ian Boyko]

I think that's a good question, and that's the way we're looking at it.

I hope the committee is not looking at this through a straw. This is a very specific amendment, yes, but for us it's very hard to talk about improving the proof of residence without talking about vouching procedures. This amendment will do nothing for students who move away to go to school, most of whose identification is probably at their parents' address but they want to vote in the city in which they are attending school. There's nothing in this amendment that will improve that situation. They won't have sufficient proof of residence. And things get worse if you're in a university residence, where previously residence dons would be able to vouch for everybody on their floor. As a proof of residence, that's no longer possible.

But I think you're right. I've seen virtually no evidence, either this fall or last spring, that voter fraud is something that's being properly dealt with.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

I guess the issue then—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Mr. Angus, we really need to stick to the relevance of this bill.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I am sticking to the relevance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

In my opinion, you're not, and I wish to differ. We have had discussions in this committee.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Chair, we have been trying to make this bill move, but if I'm continually being told the question of vouching and declarations is not in this bill, I would have to say, Mr. Chair, that I'm very—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I'm going to allow you some leeway. I know, Mr. Angus, that you haven't been to all these committee meetings when we have discussed a multitude of other options. This is Bill C-16...or Bill C-18.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

No, it's Bill C-18, Mr. Chair, and I have been sitting in on Bill C-18 through the entire...so if you want to pat me on the head as a little child, that's fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

It should be a little easier to stay relevant, then.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Well, yes.

Mr. Boyko, we will go back. I'm sorry I have a hostile chair here.

The issue of vouching, which is being touted as the fix for the million who were identified but doesn't speak to the 700,000 urban people.... You're speaking of students. Will the issue of vouching work, or would a simple situation, whereby we have a statutory declaration or the students' ability to swear an oath to say where they live, allow students to become enfranchised? Do you believe that would work?

[Ian Boyko]

I believe that could work. I can't answer that question definitively, because I don't think Parliament has undertaken a thorough study of the best way to minimize voter fraud and enfranchise those with transient addresses. I don't have all the solutions, but I see no evidence that Parliament has undertaken sufficient study to examine all the options.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madame Bradford, I'd like to ask you about vouching. That's being touted as the solution for people who, for whatever reason, do not appear on the voters list and slip through the cracks. Will the issue of vouching suffice? Do we need to go to a simpler amendment, in the case where someone does not meet the necessary requirement but is willing to swear an oath? Would that address concerns about Bill C-18?

[Tina Bradford]

If one looks at the requirements of the vouching process, the person who's vouching must be on the voters list and in the same polling division as the person they are vouching for. That means you need to find someone who lives in the same hotel or shelter as you who is somehow magically on the voters list and in your polling division. They must live very close to you. In practicality, in my experience, the vouching system for people who live in poverty and have difficulty obtaining identification is impossible. In all of the elections in which I've been involved, I've only been able to use that vouching system once. With respect, it's a ridiculous system and provides nothing for people who are trying to vote.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

Do you believe, from your experience, there were widespread cases of voter fraud with the system that existed? This is what we're trying to fix.

[Tina Bradford]

In all of my time volunteering in polling stations and on the street, I have never once experienced any form of voter fraud. I have experienced situations where people, who are sometimes voting for the first time in their lives and really want to vote, are often turned away. Most of the people I deal with are more concerned about finding their next meal; they're not going from polling station to polling station trying to fabricate identification in order to vote numerous times. I don't know where this information is coming from, to be quite honest.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

Mr. Angus, you're well over six minutes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

We want openness on this, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Let's be even more open.

Are there any more questions about Bill C-18 for our witnesses?

Mr. Angus, I will offer you the mike, but I'm going to hold you to relevance.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

My final question is for Mr. Quail.

You mentioned in your presentation that because this bill is not addressing the issues, 700,000 voters will be affected. Nobody around this table has challenged you on that. Are you sure of those numbers? It would be a staggering indictment of this committee if it has not done due diligence and 700,000 Canadian voters are unable to vote in the next election.

[James (Jim) Quail]

Yes. My source for that number is Jean-Pierre Kingsley, the former Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, who is a highly respected expert on electoral affairs and has an enormous knowledge of the electoral system in Canada. He provided a report after every election, as you know, and testified before this committee. So I feel confident that I'm on very solid ground when I rely on what Mr. Kingsley has said.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

When do you expect this case to go to court? Do you have any timelines based on other court challenges?