Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 22nd, 2007

[Keith Archer]

My comment is on calculating the incremental cost of this initiative. I guess I would caution against simply saying that the way to do that is to take the $34 million estimated cost and divide that by the likely increase in the number of people participating through advance polling.

I think a more reasonable way of calculating the incremental cost is to look at the cost of advance polling overall and then ask the question as to whether advance polling is worth the cost, given the number of people who take advantage of advance polling, and then have a discussion about how best to implement the advance polling initiative.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much.

Monsieur Paquette, five minutes.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I have a question concerning clarification of a technical point. You said that, in your sample of 151 elections, six elections allowed for two consecutive regular polling days. How many countries does that represent?

[Agnieszka Dobrzynska]

There were three countries: Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Namibia. Those are the only three countries in the world that have two polling days. There's also Zimbabwe, but it's not a democratic country. Italy was added two years ago, in 2005, but it isn't yet part of our sample.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I'd like to go back to our discussion on young people. I'm reading the following in your presentation:

First, increased advance voting opportunities are likely to do little to close the turnout gap between the young and old.

We understand that this increases the turnout rates of both groups.

Indeed, while also increasing overall participation, it will likely widen the gap in turnout between the young and the old.

[Peter John Loewen]

The particular reason why it won't close the gap is because older citizens are more likely to take advantage of increased convenience opportunities. We'd expect that citizens in every age group would take advantage of these convenience opportunities of having an extra day of voting and having an extra day of advance voting at the back end, but we would expect that as citizens get older, they'd be more likely to take advantage of those extra opportunities to vote. So within every group it should have a positive impact on participation, but the most positive impact should be among citizens as they get older.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Ultimately, the problem I see in the proposal to hold two votes... Because there's no denying the facts: these are two consecutive regular polling days, even though the rules would not be entirely the same. Wouldn't it simply be preferable to add a fourth advance polling day to the three already existing? We currently have one on Friday, another on Saturday and a third on Monday. We could add a day, the Thursday or Friday preceding the election, for example, with polling stations grouped together in a few places. That would demonstrate parliamentarians' will to promote voter turnout at a reasonable cost and would have quite similar effects to what the $34 million would produce.

I suggest the idea to you; you can comment on it if you wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Mr. Franks, please.

[Ned Franks]

I think you're splitting hairs there. To my mind, it doesn't make much difference if you.... The recommendation is to increase the advance polling days, and that one comes from the studies from the work of Elections Canada and it seems to me to have a pretty thorough basis. As I say, I support that, with the question that I raised about the Sunday before polling day. I don't think negotiating, cutting one day off or adding one day on, apart from that one issue, is terribly useful. I think you either go for the package or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Merci.

Mr. Angus.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We certainly do have problems when we count $34 million and try to divide it by how many people. It somewhat becomes a bit of a red herring. I guess, again, the question we have to ask is the best way to use money to ensure that we're getting voters out.

We just had the Ontario election, and it was very instructive for issues of advance polling and problems with voting that we saw. We tried to get advance polling on the James Bay coast for the Cree. Well, that wasn't considered a priority by Elections Ontario, and on election day we heard the chief of one of the communities saying, “Nobody in our community will be voting, because this is when we're out hunting.” So we lost an entire section of our region that was unable to vote because Elections Ontario didn't think it was of significant importance to make advance opportunities for those isolated regions.

So on the question of how best to spend this money, I have to keep getting back to the issue we have, two scenarios: we have advance polling; and we have full-day Sunday, the two-day scenario.

The other day, my colleague from the Conservative Party had said that it would be a great opportunity, because people would go to church and then they could go downstairs and vote. I guess my sense from the demographics—and I'd like to get a sense from you—is that the people who get up on Sunday morning and go to church regularly are pretty much within the frame of people we can count on to vote. If they're going to get up at eight o'clock and go to church every Sunday, they're most likely to participate in their civic duty. So is the extra Sunday the best use of money to ensure that they have ease of voting when we've provided all these other opportunities?

[Keith Archer]

I have heard that there are two kinds of objections to the use of Sunday as the effective second voting day. One is the problem with a potential conflict with religious observance and concern that some people may have with that. The second is more administrative—that is, evidently about 10% or 11% of our polling stations are located in churches. It strikes me that the administrative challenge is not an overwhelmingly difficult one to overcome. One could simply look for other public spaces in which to conduct the elections.

On the question as to whether Canadians object to voting on Sundays, I haven't seen any empirical evidence to substantiate that. So the two objections I've heard to using Sunday as the second voting day strike me as things that actually could be overcome.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Mr. Franks, please.

[Ned Franks]

I want to make one comment about Sunday. You're thinking of just one religion. If you're thinking broad range about religions, you have to think of Saturday and Friday as well as voting days and how that would affect religions. There might well be others that I'm not aware of in there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

Colleagues, that finishes the round that I had suggested, but we do have witnesses here, and I think if there are any other short comments, we can do that.

Mr. Lukiwski, I was pretending not to see you, but I'm going to ask you for a brief comment, very brief, and then Madam Redman, and then that's it.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Just to clarify my remarks for Charlie's benefit, what I've heard from people in my riding is that Sunday would work for them because they could vote as a family unit, but primarily because under the auspices of this bill they would be able to vote in their hometown at their regular polling station, as opposed to travelling an hour and a half to an advance polling station. So that's where they thought the benefit would be, not just because it was Sunday but because their regular polling stations would be open on that Sunday and it would be a convenience for them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Madam Redman, please.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I have just two points.

I would like to clarify that I was in no way trying to put a price tag on democracy, but saying that if we're going to spend $34 million, what's the best result for that investment?

Do any of you know whether studies have been done if we were to suggest a Saturday? I think there are some provinces, and certainly some countries, where they vote on a Saturday. Was Saturday ever looked at? It may be a way to deal with some of the comments we heard from religious groups who objected to having the polling stations in their place of worship on the day they actually worship.

To Mr. Loewen and associate, was there any ability or any attempt to characterize the influx and the increase in advance polling in the last election as being due to the fact of the time of year it was, the fact that it was over Christmas, that weather could more likely be inclement than at other times of the year, and the fact that there would be many seniors who are snowbirds who would be looking to travelling, that it may have been a bit of an anomaly and the time of year the actual election is held may have some impact on the uptake of advance polls?

[Peter John Loewen]

I think that's a reasonable inference: that the fact that the weather was bad and that people travel over that period could lead to the increase in advance voting. It doesn't bear on our contention or our finding that of those people who advance-voted, 60% would not have voted otherwise. I think that's a fair estimate of how many people advance voting brings into the system generally. Whether advance voting is done by 10% of voters or 5% of voters, some significant share of those voters would not vote otherwise.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Let me just clarify. Are those first-time voters who had not previously voted, or are those people who would have been on a plane to Florida on the actual day, and that's why they would not have voted, if they hadn't had the opportunity of the timing of the advance poll?

[Peter John Loewen]

Let me put it to you this way, and I hope this clarifies. They're people who we infer through our model would not have voted if advance voting had not been available in this election.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

That wraps up this session. I want on behalf of the committee to thank all the witnesses for the time you took to prepare for today and for the fact that you actually came here. You gave very insightful answers. On behalf of the committee, I appreciate this very much. All Canadians thank you for your work and your commitment.

You are excused. Thank you.

Colleagues, we are going to take the last few minutes. There is a meeting in this room right after us, so we have to hurry. I will mention that there have been discussions taking place, and I think we've solved the steering committee issue, in that we've agreed to meet on Monday at eleven o'clock in Room 112-N.

The issue of who participates in that committee has not been resolved; however, I feel it's important to get through that committee meeting first. The reason is, I'm not wishing to entertain motions of any kind when there is legislation before us until I am instructed by the steering committee.

If I may just drift aside for one second, I would like to apologize to Madam Redman. In my attempt to maintain civility here in the committee, I think I crossed the line, and I offer my sincerest apologies. You have my greatest respect and admiration. I apologize for the sternness of my comments. In no way did I mean them to be that way. I also apologize to members of the committee for the same reasons.

Colleagues, we have the possibility of ordering in the minister for one hour on Tuesday from eleven to twelve on Bill C-6, and from twelve to one on Bill C-18. We also have some more witnesses we will try to set up for Thursday. It looks as though we are going to have another four witnesses on this particular issue for Thursday.

Perhaps I should ask whether that's acceptable, at this stage of the game, to the committee members.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, colleagues. I appreciate that very much. We'll go ahead with that plan.

I want to remind again that Monsieur Mayrand has invited committee members to attend his office for a basic meet-and-greet and to see the facilities. The invitation is for next Wednesday evening from five to seven or Thursday evening from five to seven. I haven't heard from any members.

Mr. Reid, please.