Evidence of meeting #5 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sunday.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Mr. Angus, if you have a question that's pressing and you have to leave, I'd be happy to ask the question for you. Thank you.
Again, I'd like to welcome the witnesses to the committee.
Mr. Foster, perhaps you would introduce yourself. If you have an opening statement, keep it to one minute, please.
Joe Foster Chair, Federal Council, Green Party of Canada
Good afternoon everybody.
Good day. Thank you for allowing me to be here.
My name is Joe Foster, and I am chair of the federal council for the Green Party of Canada and also the shadow cabinet advocate for human rights. Formerly I was the shadow cabinet advocate for democracy and good government. I think there's a difference between those two things.
I am pleased that we are able to speak to you today. I have just a few quick comments as introduction.
I do think this bill misses the mark in terms of improving voting. There is much more to be done. I had the good fortune to listen to the other two groups earlier this morning, and I hope there'll be some time to comment on those things.
I did a straw poll last night among some friends—I don't think any of them were Green—and to my surprise they were quite against increasing the number of voting days. They said we can go to the returning officer, we have the advance polls, and we also have the polling day itself. But the most cogent comment made was that if you increase the voting day to include Sunday, the usual moral suasion that surrounds “Have you voted yet today, and if not, are you going to today?” disappears. People can say they'll do it tomorrow, but mañana never comes. So I think that is a major issue.
Hopefully I can talk about young people--I think the young people who need to be targeted are below the age of 18--and about getting them interested in democratic responsibility.
Conservative
Gilbert Gardner General Director, Bloc Québécois
Thank you.
We believe that what the bill sets out to do is commendable, but that the ways proposed of achieving this are totally inappropriate. It has already been observed in the past that more advanced polling does not necessarily lead to an overall increase in voter turnout. What is observed is merely a transfer effect. A second polling day will keep voter turnout stable. One may argue, in other words, that voted turnout will remain the same, except that it will be spread over two days.
What do the studies tell us? Studies conducted by Elections Canada in no way point to the number of polling days as the issue at hand. The two main reasons for poor voter turnout—and these are the reasons most frequently given—are, firstly, voter perception that politicians are dishonest and corrupt, and secondly, the belief that voting is a pointless exercise.
Now then, regarding the belief that voting is pointless, fortunately the Bloc Québécois has been on the scene since 1993. This is given hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers an opportunity to freely express their conviction that Quebec must become a sovereign nation.
When it comes to people abstaining from voting, there are two reasons that come into play. Once again, the various scandals that have occurred, whether it be the sponsorship scandal, Airbus, or some other incident, have had a considerable impact in enumeration areas where traditionally voters have supported federalism. In the last two elections there's been a participation rate of between 40% and 45% which confirms the reasons outlined in the various studies conducted by the Chief Electoral Officer. The other tactic employed by voters to abstain is to spoil their ballot. Of the 118,000 invalid ballots cast in 2004, 58% were cast in Quebec. So that's also something to consider. I'll come back to more concrete proposals for increasing voter turnout later.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Merci.
We're going to have time for one round, colleagues. We'll do the same thing; just share your time, if you need it. If you don't need it, just pass on it.
Madame Robillard.
Liberal
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Thank you very much for being here today. I have two specific questions for Mr. Gardner. You're from Quebec, and I'm sure you know how things work at the provincial level. In Quebec, advanced polling does take place on a Sunday. The official polling day is Monday. Have you had an opportunity to compare voter turnout at the provincial and federal levels? Our advanced polls takes place on Friday, Saturday, and Monday. In Quebec, it's on a Sunday. Have you observed any difference in participation rates?
General Director, Bloc Québécois
I don't have that information. I'm not aware of these figures.
Liberal
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Do you think such a comparison might be useful?
General Director, Bloc Québécois
Indeed, one solution could be to conduct advanced polling based on the current rules, and not the rules set out in the bill, in other words several advanced polls could be held in the same location, which is the case with traditional advanced polling. People would be informed that they are able to take part in advanced polling.
Liberal
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
We have had no hard and fast evidence presented to us to date that adding these two days will increase voter turnout. If we had proof that Sunday is a better day, we could move the advanced polls from Friday to Sunday. For example, young students don't go to university or CEGEP on Mondays and they vote in greater numbers on Sundays. However, we still don't have any evidence that adding or changing days is necessary.
Do you understand what I'm trying to say?
Liberal
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Do you think that the Chief Electoral Officer should, for example, test this approach in a federal by-election before applying it across the board? We still don't have any evidence, as members of the parliamentary committee, on which to base our position on this issue.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
One of the solutions we wanted to put forward was to allow the Chief Electoral Officer to do trials during by-elections. The problem of voter turnout is worse during by-elections.
Let me remind you of three by-elections that were held: Témiscamingue in 2004 with 29% voter turnout; Lévis in 2004 with 24%; and Berthier in 2002 with 28.6%. That is a real voter turnout problem. If you look at voter participation rates in Canada from 1896 to 2006, you see that the variations are not large. There were peaks at 80%, but the average voter turnout rate remains consistent at around 60% or 70%.
However, by-elections present a real problem. Let's allow the Chief Electoral Officer to do some trials according to the objectives and the mechanisms provided for in the act during by-elections. Then, the real impact could be measured more scientifically. All studies have shown that distance between the place of residence and the polling station is a more important factor in voter turnout than the number of hours the polls are opened.
Liberal
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Wouldn't a pilot project conducted strictly during a by-election falsely represent what actually happens during a general election? I don't have any scientific proof, but I've always heard said that during by-elections, voters are less motivated because they're only voting for a representative in their riding and not for a government. So the voter is less motivated when not choosing a government. You know full well that sometimes voters vote for the local candidate, sometimes for the local party and sometimes for the next government.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
I start from the premise that voter turnout is a problem mainly during by-elections. With respect to general elections, consider the statistics since 1896: the voter turnout rate has been relatively stable. Moreover, declining voter participation rates is a major trend that has been observed internationally and in the western world.
We therefore do not think that the provisions of this bill will counter... There are other solutions. Let me give you one example. We acted quickly in response to requests from seniors by allowing them to vote in their place of residence or by setting up revisal offices and polling stations in senior centres.
We complain about voter turnout among young people. For a significant number of months, students often live in university and college dorms. Why not require Elections Canada, for a much lesser cost than what this bill would entail, to set up revisal offices and special polling stations that would allow a student from Sept-Îles who attends Laval University to vote in his riding of Sept-Îles by way of a special vote during the advanced poll period? In my opinion, such measures would bring young people closer to the electoral process.
We moved quickly to correct the situation for seniors. However, we continue to complain about the low voter turnout among the young, even though we have taken no practical, simple or concrete steps to allow them to exercise their right to vote.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you very much for coming.
I have a couple of comments, and then maybe I'll ask you to respond. I'm referring to all of our witnesses.
I want to re-emphasize the fact that this bill was introduced for one primary purpose--namely, to try to increase voter turnout. That's something that I think all of us around this committee table can agree on: if we increase voter turnout, that's a good thing, and it's just a matter of do we get there. Many of our witnesses have identified other areas--the root cause behind voter dissatisfaction, apathy, that type of thing--but the fact remains that I have yet to hear anyone say that increasing the number of opportunities to cast ballots would actually have no effect or a detrimental effect on voter turnout. Many have argued that there would be a marginal increase in voter turnout. Nonetheless, everyone seems to agree that giving expanded voting opportunities would probably increase voter turnout.
Now, if someone wants to do a cost-benefit analysis after this is all over--i.e., we increased voter turnout by 1%, but it cost us $32 million, so is it worth it?--then fine, we can have that discussion. But again, I want to focus in on the fact that we are trying to do something in this legislation, and that is to find some way to start to increase voter participation.
I can give you an observation here, although maybe not exact statistical information, about information that comes from Saskatchewan, which is one of three provinces, as I'm sure you're all aware, that allow advance polls on Sunday. In Saskatchewan we just had a recent provincial election, and advance polls were open on Sunday. The information I have is that the number of ballots cast in the advance poll was higher on the Sunday than on any other day of the week.
To me, this reinforces what I've been hearing consistently in my riding: people like the idea that they have the ability to vote on Sundays because they have more time, or usually they have more time. The majority of people have more access, more free time. Many people in my riding have consistently stated--whether or not they have an objection to voting on a day of rest, or whether or not they think there's an intrusion on their religious opportunities to worship--that they like the fact that they have more time available to them to vote on Sunday. Most of the people I've surveyed really seem to appreciate the fact that this is different from a normal advance poll. The Sunday immediately preceding the general election would have polling stations at all the regular voting locations, as opposed to a normal advance poll.
Mr. Preston already alluded to the fact that in rural Canada many people have to travel an hour, and sometimes more than an hour, just to get to an advance poll location. Yet this bill suggests that on the Sunday immediately preceding voting day, all normal voting locations will be open. So rather than having to travel an hour or an hour and a half to an advance polling location, they could probably travel five minutes and get to a poll.
Others argue, and perhaps rightfully so, that this means in effect two days of full voting as opposed to one. Well, be that as it may, it gives people more opportunity to cast a ballot. We've heard from witnesses previously that if they'd had this opportunity before, probably they would have voted.
So I guess my comment is that although this may not be the panacea for all that's wrong with the voting system...and there are many things wrong, I suppose, with the electoral or political system these days. Mr. Gardner mentioned a few of them, and why people are dissatisfied and perhaps choose not to vote. While there are many other reasons or root causes for voter dissatisfaction, would you not agree that this bill perhaps, in some small measure, will actually increase voter participation?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Mr. Lukiwski, you first offered it to all the witnesses. Did you want to direct it?
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
I would like comments from Mr. Foster and Mr. Gardner.
Conservative
Chair, Federal Council, Green Party of Canada
Thank you very much.
As I already mentioned, my reaction is no, I think there's a possibility that this would actually decrease motivation. One thing to consider is that they already think the government wastes money. Spending another $34 million on another day in an election, with all sorts of increased problems, finding people to man the stations, security over the two days, and so on....
I think the image that's being provided is that it's a gimmick to try to get people out when they're not really wanting to address the real issues that you could really ask people about in a citizens forum. I hear a lot of guessing here--we think this might happen, we think that might be the case--but we don't know. And I don't think this standing committee has the time or resources to do that. A citizens forum would do that.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
You can operate by trial and error in life. You try to solve the problem one way, and if that doesn't work, you try something else.
I'd like to refer to two studies by Elections Canada that I would urge you to read. You have in your possession the document entitled Potential impact of extending advanced polling on voter turnout, which clearly states:
The fact that advanced polling is facilitated does not have a significant impact on people who do not follow political news events.
Another study by Carleton University and the University of Toronto which involved a scientific poll of over 2,000 people, including a pool of voters and a pool of non-voters, explored the reasons why people do not vote. Not having enough time to vote, either at advanced polls or on voting day, was never cited as a reason for not voting.
Let me give you another example. During the last election, in the riding of Louis-Hébert, the turnout for advanced polls was 19%. It was believed that the turnout on polling day would be 80%, or an increase of almost 150%. Well, that's not what happened. Instead of voting on polling day, people voted in advanced polls, and the total turnout was 60%, just as in previous elections. The overall turnout rate didn't change because of the advance polls. Voting patterns simply shifted.
If you want to shift things around, you're free to do so, but in the final analysis you will not achieve your objective which is to increase voter turnout. The studies you have before you indicate that it won't happen.
Conservative
Bloc
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
I have a brief question for you, but I want to share something that came to mind following what Mr. Lukiwski said.
He was saying that people like to vote on Sunday, that it was an emotional thing. If you have any studies to the effect that people like to vote on Sunday, instead of adding days, why don't we have them vote on Sundays rather than Mondays? “D” day should be Sunday.
In other democracies, D day is Sunday. If you think that we' d have a better voter turnout if election day was on a Sunday, according to the studies you' ve seen, it could be done on a Sunday.
I'd like to address my Bloc Québécois colleagues. You cited the main reasons for lack of interest and you made certain suggestions such as requiring Elections Canada to locate revisal offices in universities and CEGEPs, which is something I agree with and which has been requested by many students. You also proposed putting a pilot project to the test during by-elections.
Do you have any other suggestions for us?