Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 29th, 2007

[David Docherty]

Maybe Jon is better geared to talk about the voter ID card.

In terms of the $34 million and is this the best use of money, I think we haven't even talked about electronic voting. That's such a huge issue. I think this is a far better first step than going down that road at this stage, because I think there are all kinds of problems that would have to be addressed with it. I think $34 million spent on this is probably better. I can't imagine how much it would cost to institute a secure, safe electronic voting system. In terms of this, I think it's probably a pretty good use of money.

In terms of the permanent voters list, I know Belgium has it. Earlier studies suggested that most Canadians voted in one of three elections. Jon may have more up-to-date data than that in terms of whether mandatory voting would solve some of that problem or not.

[Prof. Jon Pammett]

Mandatory voting would certainly solve the problem. Of course, generally, public opinion doesn't favour it, so I think it's a lost cause to be promoting it in our case.

Australia votes on Saturdays, and of course when they have the mandatory voting it's difficult to disentangle the voting. But I've certainly heard the chief electoral officer of Australia talk about how they get at least half the vote before noon on Saturdays, when people are out doing their marketing or whatever. If there are objections to Sundays, you could consider a Saturday solution. Of course, that wouldn't butt up against a Monday election, but Friday-Saturday would work.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you, Madam Redman.

Monsieur Proulx.

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

Thank you.

I have two quick questions, and I haven't got time to thank you for being here.

The first question. When you're talking of statistics in regard to why the participation is higher one day than the other, whether it be summer or winter, do you not think that's relative to the efforts made by the individual parties? Do you not think this is a show of strength or weakness on the part of the parties, in the sense that they get their people out there to vote? That's number one.

My number two question is on the $34 million. I don't want to talk about enumeration because the chair is going to cut me off. However, our system is based on the fact that people are on the list or they're not on the list. The ones who are on the list are aware of what's happening. They're getting documentation in the mail and they know that there's something happening, so they look into it.

I grant it that there is advertising in newspapers, television, the whole shebang, but I'm not convinced that people who are not on the list, whether they be young people or much older, are actually grabbing what's happening with the messages on TV and in the newspapers. I believe that if they were receiving a postcard or a letter addressed to them personally they'd be much more hooked into the voting system.

I just want to have your long comments on this because he's going to cut me off.

Mr. Chair, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

That was very slick.

[David Docherty]

In terms of the advance polls and the weather and the election-specific effects, we don't know. One can only intuitively assume that in a winter election, the parties were probably telling the voters they had identified as core voters that if the weather was nice, they should get out there to vote, and here are the advance polls. They're pulling their vote in the advance polls because you don't know....

Those are election-specific effects. Is that why we had more voter turnout in advance polls in 2006 than in 2004? Probably, but that's the only answer we can give in the absence of empirical data.

Jon, did you want to talk about it?

[Prof. Jon Pammett]

I'm not quite sure what subject I'm being asked to address here.

Regarding your comments on the list, young voters can get on the list by registering at the polls on election day. The problem there is that it's an extra deterrent. No card comes in the mail if you're not already on the list, so you're not given that reminder. Requiring an extra step for people for whom going out might be a marginal decision is an extra problem. A lot of young people do mention this as a reason for not voting, if they're not on the list.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Mr. Reid is next.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to both our witnesses for being here.

As a former political science student at Carleton University, I somehow managed to go through the entire thing without ever being in one of your classes, Professor Pammett, and that was probably my misfortune.

I can concur with the insight that for the purposes of getting my vote, there was certainly no need to open the polls on Sundays before noon when I was a student, that's for sure.

I agree with you as well on the problems of the permanent voters list. I got a bit of an insight into this when, inexplicably, between 2004 and 2006 I went from being one voter to three voters on the list. I was living alone, but Scott Reid, Jeffery Reid, and Scott Jeffery Reid were all recorded as living at my address. It's a whole new and different kind of expanded voter opportunity there for you.

Anyway, I've been thinking about why certain people and certain groups come out and vote at advance polls. They're not a simple cross-section of society: seniors come out much more. I'm guessing it has something to do with the same reason seniors get all their Christmas shopping done early; they are able to structure their lives because fewer contingencies arise to throw off their schedule, such as a hockey practice for the kids being changed or something unexpected happening. Those are just the kinds of things that go on when you're a parent and you're earlier on in life.

Given that observation, it strikes me that you'll find that it's certain kinds of seniors--younger seniors, those who are more mobile. I don't know that for a fact; I simply suspect it.

I wanted to ask about the idea of voting at advance polls that are open at all locations. My impression--and it's just an impression, but it seems logical to me, and I wonder if you think I'm right in this--is that people who do not have the mobility to get to advance polls, which may be located far from home and at only a few centralized locations, would be more likely to take advantage of advance polls if they were open at all locations.

I'm thinking here, for example, of students, who typically don't have cars; people who are homeless; shut-in seniors, who may rely upon a family member to come from a different area and drive them to their polling station; those who are handicapped; and those who have similar sorts of needs. In theory, they can vote by other means earlier on, but that doesn't always happen.

Do you agree that this group would likely benefit more than other groups in society from a wider range of locations for advance polling?

[David Docherty]

Very quickly, I would just say yes. People who vote in advance polls, we seem to indicate, have higher socio-economic status, meaning they not only know where the advance polls are but also have better means to get there. So if you increase the locations for advance polls and they're closer to where they would normally vote, then yes, you'll probably catch a larger group of those individuals. Whether they would vote because of that or not, we don't know, but the opportunity is certainly much greater for those individuals.

[Prof. Jon Pammett]

Yes, I agree with the premise to that question.

I started off by saying that people who vote at advance polls were determined to vote, and part of this determination involves finding out where the few advance polls really are. I mean, it's not entirely obvious where they would be. Having them open at all locations at one particular time would I think encourage their use. I think it would also encourage their use by younger people, as well as by the older people who now are more likely to seek out advance polls.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Am I out of time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Yes, you are. I'm sorry.

Madame Picard, please.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In the document we were given, entitled "Potential Impacts of Extended Advance Voting on Voter Turnout", by the holder of the Canada Research Chair in Electoral Studies, the experts say, and I quote:

The use of alternative voting methods varies from one country to another, and the expanded voting time frame of Bill C-55 would make Canada a unique case in the world. To our knowledge, only Swedish legislative electoral law provides a similar combination of voting opportunities.

I would like to review a bit of the history of advance polls. At first, they were used only for people who could not get to the polls on voting day, on "D-day". They were only for those people, because they could not vote because they were travelling outside Canada or for whatever reason. They had to state the reasons why they could not vote.

In my opinion, if there higher turnout at advance polls, it is something all the parties strongly encourage. In every riding, for every party, there is almost a race to the advance polls. I have heard people say they had to win the advance polls. So all of the volunteers who are going to work on election day vote in advance. If it is winter, they encourage people to vote at the advance polls: there are phone banks, the parties have strategies to get more and more people out to the advance polls. I think it is honest to say that. I do not believe that having two elections days is likely to encourage voter turnout.

As the chief electoral officer of Quebec said, if you really want to encourage voting on "D-day", it has to be on Sunday rather than Monday, but not two days in a row.

What do you think of all that?

[Prof. Jon Pammett]

Well, moving to a single election day on a weekend, either a Saturday or Sunday, would be an option. I think the studies worldwide, as I mentioned before, show that countries that do hold their elections on a weekend have higher turnouts. They're not all that much higher, but they can be higher. So if that were an option, I suppose you could argue for it. I'm simply addressing the proposal that's before us here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Professor Docherty.

[David Docherty]

I wouldn't have anything to add to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much, colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Angus.

On behalf of the committee, I want to thank the witnesses for attending today and for their insightful answers.

Obviously you're very well researched on the subject. We certainly appreciate the answers and the help you have given the committee to make their decisions.

I will excuse the witnesses at this point, and I will suspend the meeting so we can have our other expert witnesses come to the table.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Colleagues, let's bring our meeting back to order. We will start with our next set of witnesses.

I want to welcome to the committee Mr. Ouellet and Mr. Wilkie. We appreciate your being here.

Colleagues, we are still discussing Bill C-16 and the issue of an advance polling day.

I'm going to invite our witnesses to take a brief moment to introduce themselves.

If you have an opening statement, you're welcome to do that. If we could keep it to two minutes or three minutes, that would be appreciated. Then we'll start our rounds of questioning.

Perhaps we could start with Monsieur Ouellet, please.

[Jean Ouellet, Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Saskatchewan]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members of the committee, I am accompanied today by David Wilkie, the Assistant Chief Electoral Officer of Saskatchewan. I am Jean Ouellet, the Chief Electoral Officer of Saskatchewan.

Before I begin my remarks, I would certainly like to thank the members of the committee for inviting us to present the views of the office of the Chief Electoral Officer of Saskatchewan regarding your bill.

It is often considered that high voter turnouts are desirable, as it is generally seen as evidence of legitimacy of those who are elected; alternatively, low turnout is associated with an inaccurate reflection of the will of the people.

The Province of Saskatchewan has just undergone its 26th general election on November 7, 2007. The preliminary calculated turnout stands at slightly over 76%. We can be very envious of that, I think. This represents an increase of approximately 5% from the last general election of November 5, 2003. Many scholars will peer over the results of this particular election--and we had two this morning--to try to find a reason or reasons for this increase, as generally turnouts are falling.

It is not my intention to second-guess the reason or reasons for this success; however, I believe that political entities and the election administrator have a role to play in securing greater participation in electoral events by eligible electors. For example, a close race between political participants will generate greater interest among voters, and political parties will find getting their votes out an easier task to accomplish.

As election administrators, we constantly look at other jurisdictions for ways to make our process more accessible to electors. Rules and laws are easier to change than attitudes. Ease of voting is certainly a factor in the rate of turnout.

Looking at Bill C-16, I believe the proposed legislation will give electors greater opportunity to exercise their franchise. With regard to the proposal for five days of advance polls, the Province of Saskatchewan already has five days of advance polls. Our period of five days is no less than one day before polling day, but no more than seven days before polling day. As a rule, it's generally one day before polling day.

Because the Province of Saskatchewan does not have a fixed day of the week for its election, depending on which day the election is called, one of those advance poll days will be on a Sunday. Sundays are generally when most voters are away from work, although this perspective is changing constantly.

The Province of Saskatchewan's electoral period is a minimum of 28 days and a maximum of 34 days, of which there are all but two days during which electors cannot cast a ballot. Those two days are the day before the start of the advance poll period and the day before election day to permit the returning officer to inform their deputy returning officer of those who have voted.

Having reviewed some of the proposed provisions of the bill from an election administrator's point of view, I would raise a few concerns that have already been echoed by Mr. Mayrand, our Chief Electoral Officer for Canada.

The conduct of the last day of the advance poll on a Sunday before election day would present some difficulties if the voting is to be carried out under a different rule than would be carried out the day following. It is more and more difficult to find workers who will accept the work for a day, let alone two consecutive days of voting. Also, let's not forget that there is a check and balance in the system, and that's the candidate's representative. They will also have two days of advance polls; they will be there for two days, and they're generally volunteers.

There could also be instances where two different sets of deputy returning officers and poll clerks may have to be hired to cover the two voting opportunities. Legislation should make sure that returning officers have all the tools to obtain the polling material from any previous poll team, should it ever be required. For example, I remember in my days when I was an assistant returning officer, where the evening before voting day, one of our DROs had a heart attack; the polling material was locked in the car and there was no way we could get that material. So if you have a ballot box that is locked in a car and you can't access it, your count will be very delayed and incomplete.

As an administrator of elections, I would like to see a provision that allows for greater flexibility for the electoral authority to determine whether a single day of voting for a specific polling place, be it on a Sunday or a Monday, would be adequate to cover all those individuals. For example, persons living in personal care facilities may not need that second day of voting opportunity. Visiting this location on two different days may become redundant.

Similarly, I feel the bill should offer some flexibility for polling places to be established at different locations on each day. Too often we think of urban voters. My province is, in large part, a rural province. Our polling divisions sometimes cover very large tracts of land. If we were to establish voting opportunities in one corner of the polling division one day and in another corner the other day, we'd have a greater chance of reaching those people.

In closing, I come back to the point I made earlier: ease of voting is certainly a factor in rates of turnout.

I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Wilkie, did you have anything further to add?

[David Wilkie, Assistant Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Saskatchewan]

No. I'll be able to help with the questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much.

We'll start our first round of questions. Again, I just want to remind members that because of the time, we'll stay with the five-minute round this first round.

Monsieur Proulx, five minutes, s'il vous plaît.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here this morning.

Mr. Ouellet, I found it interesting that you have about the same objections or the same negative thoughts as the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada on the question of administration, particularly with respect to the two days, election day and the day before.

Do you have problems finding staff in Saskatchewan, as we have just about everywhere else in Canada? The question that was asked when the Chief Electoral Officer appeared related to precisely that, staff and remuneration. It is difficult already now, so if there are two days in a row, with two sets of rules, it will be even worse.

I like your idea of having two groups of workers, one for the day before and one for election day. On the other hand, that means that there will be three categories of workers: one group for the advance poll days, we'll call them "ordinary" or "regular", another for the Sunday before election day, and a third for election day. I imagine that this would create a pretty heavy administrative burden for the elections organization, not only in Canada, or in the province, in your case, but also for the organizations and political parties.

You gave us to understand that there are a lot of rural regions in your province. You addressed that aspect delicately, talking about the possibility of having advance polls in different places, not just in the province but in each of the ridings. If, instead of spending over $30 million for Canada as a whole to get two more days, it were to be suggested to you that we keep the present number of days, but increase the number of places where people could vote at advance polls throughout the country, for each riding, what would you think of that?

For example, in a city with a population of 100,000, there are generally two places for advance polling, on average. What would you think if, instead of having two, there were four or five? If people in rural regions could travel five kilometres instead of 10 or 20 kilometres, do you think that this would facilitate voting and increase turnout?

Second, instead of adding days, I would like to hear your comments on the possibility of using those funds to improve communications and improve ways of reaching people who are not on the permanent list.