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.
Executive Director, Baptist General Conference of Canada
As a quick and dirty response, I appreciate members of Parliament going to our schools at grades five, six, and seven to teach into the lives of young students the value of civic duty. I encourage you to think not just of 18-year-olds but of eight-year-olds.
Director, Public Policy, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
I've volunteered to teach at my children's civics class when they raise political issues. I think that's a great opportunity for members of Parliament to visit all their high schools and help promote.... The students are more likely to vote for people with whom they have some kind of identification or personal contact. So I would encourage MPs and candidates to go into the schools to raise awareness among youth.
Reverend, Ottawa Presbytery, The United Church of Canada
I would echo that: to take whatever opportunities are available to connect with young people.
I think particularly of an organization provincially called the Ontario Youth Parliament, where out of the Christian context young people come together both regionally and provincially to participate in mock governments. As someone who has been a sponsor of that program, I would say that we sometimes have great difficulty finding MPs who can make themselves available to come and explain how the process works.
Liberal
Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Again, thanks to everybody who came.
We've had a pretty good discussion about the facilities issue, and I thank you for being so open about that. It doesn't seem to me to be very convenient to try to mix these two activities in the same space on the day that has traditionally been set aside for worship.
I'd like to move to the people, though. I want you to think about the congregations you're most familiar with. It would seem to me, knowing my volunteers in my riding and the people I know who serve in the polls, that they're often the same people who are volunteering at the church. I can think of two Sunday school teachers; I can think of a lady who takes care of dismantling the altar on Sundays and freshening up the flowers, etc.
I'm also thinking about the people who work in the polls, many of whom are elderly, many of whom are retired. On that one voting day, they work from about 7:30 in the morning until about 10 o'clock at night, and they are absolutely whacked out. I'm worried about their trying to do that two days in a row, when they're already maybe 75 years old—and healthy per se, but with that kind of stress.
Then I'm thinking about my volunteers, many of whom are full-time workers with children who take a day of holidays on election day to work all day, trying to do that on Sunday and Monday, etc.
I want you to address that people factor.
Executive Director, Baptist General Conference of Canada
Speaking on behalf of Baptists...amen.
Director, Public Policy, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
Advance polls are, in my opinion, the solution to this. The more advance polls, the more opportunities to vote, the better. They don't have to be the full-blown advance polls. You could have limited advance polling. That limits the volunteers and it makes more opportunities available.
I'm happy with any other time of the week. I think it solves everybody's problems.
Reverend, Ottawa Presbytery, The United Church of Canada
I think there needs to be opportunity to look at whether you do need to pull on the same people to work both days. It could be considered that there would be others, but I would echo that indeed those who volunteer in the community are often those who have a particular set of religious values that they're living out in the midst of their public life, and those are the people we're tapping most heavily.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you very much.
Madame Picard, you have four minutes, please.
Bloc
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for being here. You provided us with some very interesting information. I'd like to tell you about a particular experience I had. I've run in five elections, and in the last two, candidates from my riding who turned up at the steps of churches following a religious celebration or mass, were literally chased off the premises. Churchgoers found it highly disrespectful when candidates bothered them and wanted to shake their hand to get their vote following a religious celebration, Sunday mass, or a period of prayer. People were annoyed and found it disrespectful, so much so that the priests, reverends, or parish heads called for a ban on this type of practice because it was terribly disruptive to worshippers. My riding is both urban and rural, and it seems to be the case in every parish.
I don't agree with Mr. Lukiwski who said that polling day is a family activity. It's already a tight squeeze in most polling stations and the lineups are quite long, so much so that people often have to sit down while they wait to vote. I have trouble imagining families with babies cradled in their arms waiting to exercise their right to vote. Indeed, as far as I'm concerned, Sunday is a family day and a day where people take part in other activities aside from going to vote.
People already have enough time to cast their ballot. Currently, in Canada, you have 36 days to vote. You can go and vote anytime in the returning officer's office, you can vote by mail, there are advanced polls, and then there is also election day. Why add yet another day on Sunday? What's more, there are all of the election workers my colleague referred to who are there two days in a row and who only have one day, Sunday, left to go about their religious and family activities. This would be taken away from them. And I also think we might end up losing volunteers. You're talking about three long days of polling. I agree with you in that civic and religious activities must be separated.
Executive Director, Baptist General Conference of Canada
I think we would agree. Concerning local churches, in my tradition we encourage our people to vote, but we do not tell them for whom to vote, and we like to keep that separate. We do feel that the including of Sunday voting would be an infringement on the freedom we have on that day to think and to pause and to reflect.
So thank you for your comments.
Director, Public Policy, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
I have just one comment about the irritant of having candidates outside of a church building.
The EFC publishes an election readiness kit that stipulates that the only activities that are permitted in a church legally, or from Revenue Canada's point of view, is an all-candidates debate, where every single candidate shows up for a comment forum together, not on separate days of the week. They all have to be together. It has to be a forum in which all of them can participate in agreed-upon formats.
Reverend, Ottawa Presbytery, The United Church of Canada
There is concern that people have time to be family, but I would also say that in our United Church tradition, which has often been engaged in public policy, there is a concern that people link their faith with public decision-making. So it's not all a bad thing to have people associating the physical church or faith presence of a community with involvement in the political process.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you.
Thank you very much, colleagues.
Mr. Angus, you have the last question, please, for four minutes.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I will not need four minutes for this. I think it's fairly simple.
We're looking at a bill that's fairly technical. The question of adjusting that final Sunday really isn't on the table. It will come forth when we look at it line by line. The question is, is the rest of the bill workable? Are the other options for the extended advance polling workable, from your perspective? And on the question of turning the last Sunday into a full-out election Sunday, when it comes before us, it becomes a yes or a no option whether to support that part of the bill or not.
I think I've heard a general sense, but you have offered recommendations. At the end of the day, is the recommendation on Sunday yes or no?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you, colleagues. That ends our questioning for these witnesses.
On behalf of the committee, I want to thank the witnesses for coming out today. It's been very, very helpful.
We will suspend the meeting for two minutes to have the witnesses remove themselves from the table and to get the next group of witnesses up.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Colleagues, we'll bring the meeting back to order and begin with our second group of witnesses today. We have two witnesses.
Actually, I'm just going to turn the table over to you for a time. Please introduce yourselves and the group you represent. If you have an opening statement, feel free to do that. I'll keep that to two minutes, probably.
Ilona Dougherty, please, you're first.
Ilona Dougherty Executive Director, Apathy is Boring
Hello; my name is Ilona Dougherty. I'm the executive director of Apathy is Boring.
Apathy is Boring was founded in January 2004 by three young Canadians who were tired of seeing their peers feel disconnected from our democratic system. It's a national, youth-led, non-partisan organization that aims to use art and technology to re-engage youth in the democratic process. After gaining notoriety through well-received get-out-the-vote campaigns during the federal elections of 2004 and 2006, Apathy is Boring continues its year-round work on democracy projects that create dialogue between youth and their political leaders.
For nearly four years now, Apathy is Boring has been working towards empowering youth, statistically the least likely to vote, with the tools to inform themselves, a venue for dialogue, and an edgy and straight-talking approach. Using concerts, a clothing line, a media outreach campaign, and an informative website, Apathy is Boring has been able to reach over 500,000 young Canadians.
We know that young people are disconnected from our traditional political institutions, so we use social networking, music, and clear, accessible information to reach our generation, providing them with tools to get involved in civic life and the democratic process and particularly encouraging them to vote.
Apathy is Boring has established itself as a respected voice on youth engagement. We have been recognized and supported nationally by a diverse cross-section of NGO, corporate, and celebrity partners, not to mention ongoing recognition by the Canadian media. As a result, Apathy is Boring has begun to bridge the gap between youth and politicians, helping youth join the political dialogue once again. A great example of this is my presence here today.
The fact remains that young voters are not opting into our democratic system. Youth are disengaged, and we should make every effort possible to involve the next generation. Voting is only a small part of this issue, but it is a critical low-risk entry point for youth to show their willingness to be active citizens. Apathy is Boring believes that democracy should evolve, and that democracy should involve an opportunity for ongoing dialogue with citizens, particularly those often marginalized by society.
We must ensure that not only do we reach those youth who are readily accessible--often the over-engaged--but we must also work hard to reach out to unengaged youth, who often do not have their voices heard. Unless we encourage youth to opt into the system at a young age by voting, they have a much lower chance statistically of becoming engaged at a later stage of their lives. Apathy is Boring believes in accessibility in offering youth as many options to get involved as active citizens as possible.
The question I leave you with is this: will this bill truly expand the opportunities of youth to become active citizens in our democratic process? If we don't address the issue of youth engagement now, we will not have a representative democracy worth worrying about 20 years down the line.
I've given all of you today our youth-friendly guide to intergenerational partnerships. Hopefully today is the beginning of an intergenerational partnership in which we truly will be looking at youth engagement in voting and how we can make strides to that end.
Thank you very much.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you, Ms. Dougherty.
Mr. Anderson, please go ahead with your opening statement.
Rick Anderson Representative, Fireweed Democracy Project
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ilona is just proving, I think, that apathy is not totally boring.
My name is Rick Anderson. I spent a few years around here, about a decade in the 1980s, as a pretty active, younger Liberal, and most of the 1990s as a pretty active, less younger Reformer, a combination of resumé credentials that has managed to aggravate many of the partisans of both of those organizations.
More recently what I do in terms of my political activity is through an organization that I started, called the Fireweed Democracy Project, which is loosely aimed at addressing the range of issues that are generally gathered under the umbrella of the democratic deficit and working with people across party lines who share a common concern for strengthening the democratic qualities of our national institutions and electoral processes.
With respect to the bill before you today, I would just offer three brief comments.
First of all, I think it goes in some very positive directions.
Secondly, just as a warning note, I think there is a larger problem than has yet been publicly acknowledged by Elections Canada or by the Canadian body politic of cheating in national elections at the local level. Those of us who have been involved in internal party politics for years know that this is not entirely uncommon in the internal contests that occur in parties, and I think in the opening up of the rules in terms of people being able to show up and literally testify as to who they are, swear out an affidavit, and so on, and get themselves on the voters list, we are approaching the edge of going too far and putting temptation where we should be careful not to put it. To my knowledge, this problem has not been studied in any detail by anybody yet, but somebody should start taking a look at it, because I think we're going to start finding ourselves embarrassed by things that we learn after the fact in elections in this country.
Thirdly, the progress that this bill represents in terms of facilitating people's access to the voters list and opportunities to vote in terms of advance polling is positive. They address what I would call “the convenience factor”, which is the business of making it easier for people to access the polling station and the vote at times that are convenient for them. But they don't actually address—neither could this bill, really—the more contextual issue, which is, I think, the larger issue driving declining turnout patterns and what Ilona here is calling apathy, which is this larger sense of people being disengaged from the process, and that leads me into areas such as electoral reform, the sense that people have that their vote doesn't count, because literally, mathematically, in half the ridings of the country that's true.
Thank you.