You are welcome.
Evidence of meeting #15 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was returns.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #15 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was returns.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
You are welcome.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to the witnesses and their CEO for coming today.
I want to follow up on an issue I've raised many times before, and that has to do with voter identification. I know you received a number of submissions from MPs. We certainly sent one from Vancouver East. This goes back to Bill C-31. I don't want to lay it at your feet because you didn't suggest it, but you have to live with it.
I want to reiterate that the system as it is now, which was supposedly brought in to deal with all of this voter fraud that doesn't really exist, has created so many difficulties. We gave you one example of a man who had lived in our riding for more than 80 years and had voted there all of his life. He didn't have the right ID and was turned away, even though a scrutineer who had known him for 30 years through a community centre was there. She couldn't vouch for him because she lived in the next poll to him. He waited an hour and a half for someone to show up who was in the same poll--and this was someone very elderly. That's just one example of many. It was very frustrating and a very difficult day.
I know that you will report back to the committee on the general election with your recommendations, both legislative and administrative. Do you contemplate making changes to improve it now that we've had this first experience with the new rules? Secondly, even if you don't make legislative recommendations, what will you do about the capacity?
I'm sure this was true for many ridings, but certainly in the urban and inner-city areas, because of the new rules on ID, there were huge problems--lineups, lack of staff and resources, lack of translation, and bottlenecks of people coming through the door who didn't have ID. There weren't enough resources to send them to another electoral voting place. So even from a capacity point of view, a resourcing point of view, if nothing changes in the law and we have to deal with this again, we have to change the way it works at the local poll. Otherwise we'll be building in a level of frustration and even anger among voters for no good reason. They really are eligible to vote but just don't have the proper ID.
There's sort of the macro level of legislation, if you're going to do anything there, but even if you're not, what are we going to do at a capacity level in resourcing?
12:25 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
That's a very complex question, which I will bring back to the committee in the evaluation report later this summer. You will find in there that generally the system worked well, but some groups of electors were affected differently. My focus will be on how we can better serve those electors.
On capacity, one of the points I made in February was that it is less a capacity issue and more a matter of being captive to very prescriptive legislation. It sets out very specifically who does what on the poll side and does not allow much flexibility in how you organize tasks. It sets out how many electors should be in a poll. It sets out certain minimums and maximums for a poll.
My short answer is that without reconsideration of some of the prescriptions in the statute, it's going to be very difficult to significantly improve service at the polling stations.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Do you contemplate recommending changes to deal with how prescriptive it is?
12:30 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Yes, I do, both with respect to the management of the voting process itself at poll sites as well as with respect to voter ID.
Interestingly--and I mentioned this in February--B.C. just had a provincial election, and one of the things that B.C. had was rules for identification that are similar to what we have at the federal level, but there they accepted the voter information card as one piece of ID that established at least the address and name of the elector. That is something that, in my view, should be considered at the federal level.
The other interesting thing is that the rules on vouching at the provincial level, in B.C., at least, are somewhat more flexible. There are still some restrictions. I think that would meet the concerns of the committee and Parliament when they set out Bill C-31, but it is a little bit more flexible, so that a family member can vouch for all the members of the same family, which is not the case at the federal level.
Some of these issues and findings will feed into the recommendations that I will be bringing forward over the next year.
12:30 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
We'll first see an evaluation report about what electors have told us about the election, who's been affected, and how they have been affected. There will be the same thing for candidates and parties and also the staff. That will be followed by a third report in the late fall providing recommendations for legislative changes.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Merci beaucoup, monsieur Mayrand.
I have several questions.
First, on page 6, in the bottom part of the last paragraph, you talk about “amendments to the tariff of fees to increase the pay for election workers”. That may be available in some other document that I have not seen or have not seen in a while. What is the pay of election workers right now, and what are you proposing or will you be proposing in terms of an increase in the pay for election workers? That's one.
Secondly, you talked about some of the costs that are required when you're doing your election preparedness, for instance, the telephony services. What type of telephony services does Elections Canada usually get? Is it land lines, or are you taking advantage of some of the more cost-effective options such as wireless, etc.?
I know that for my election campaign--I think I mentioned it to you--we did not go with land lines, and we saved something like 75% of the cost. We purchased the phones and we used wireless. It was amazing.
The other one is that in your report, on page 4, you talk about planning to conduct a comprehensive A-base review. What is an A-base review?
Finally, when you talk about the auditing and the managing once an election happens, and about the expenses that are submitted by the candidates, the parties, etc., I'd like to know whether you have definitive costs to date for the work that has been required of Elections Canada as a result of the Conservative in-and-out scheme. Have those been separated out or not? And if so, what are they?
Thank you.
12:30 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Okay. Let me deal first with the telephone.
Right now, we're basically using land lines, copper lines, but remember, we need to maintain an IT infrastructure in those 308 locations across the country. In fact, it's close to 440, with sub-offices. We're looking right now at whether that is an area in which we can reduce our dependency on land lines.
There are issues, in terms of coverage, across the country. That's an analysis we're doing right now, but it looks like most of the offices that were used for the last election would be able to use wireless communication to communicate both within the riding and across the country. So certainly one of our objectives, as they say at the office, is to reduce the footprint of telephony across the country. Over time that should produce substantial savings.
You asked me also about the A-base review, which basically is taking a look at the structure of the organization, all its programs and activities, and whether they still meet the purposes for which they were set up and whether they are still aligned with the statutory mandate, of course, but also with the future direction of the organization. We also look at opportunities for either reallocating resources to higher priorities or building or finding some efficiencies in various processes we run, and, finally, we try to identify potential gaps that will need to be filled.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
So that's what the term “A-base review” means.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Okay. I had never heard the term. Thank you.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
That's a common term among bureaucrats. It's really looking at how we're spending money and whether there are efficiencies and opportunities to reallocate.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
The last piece is the cost to Elections Canada for managing, auditing, and so on, defending on the issue of the Conservative in-and-out scheme.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
As I think everybody knows, there are two processes in place. One is a civil dispute that is taking place before the Federal Court. The last I looked, we had spent about $280,000 in legal fees on that dispute.
As we also know, there is an investigation by the Commissioner of Canada Elections. I believe his costs are approaching $1.2 million at this point in time.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Mayrand, for being here today.
I want to refer to page 6 of your notes in English, the first full paragraph. Just prior to that, I think I heard you indicate that there were 1,602 candidates, and 680 were entitled to final reimbursement.
I'm confused as to the final reimbursement entitlement. Only 101 audits have been completed entitling the candidate to that final reimbursement. Is that implying that not all candidates who receive the final reimbursement are audited?
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
No. It implies that these audits have not been completed yet. They are in progress.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
So it's possible, then, if I understand correctly, that if they're entitled to a final reimbursement, that could happen prior to the audit.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Not prior to the audit. The audit has to be completed for final reimbursement.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Do you understand my confusion? Only 101 audits have been done, yet 680 candidates are entitled to a final reimbursement. That's confusing to me. I'm sorry. I'm not an accountant.
12:35 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
These candidates have shown that they incurred expenses that will require additional reimbursement. All candidates who reach the threshold of 10% receive 15% of the spending limit in their ridings.
Of all those candidates, 931 receive that first 15%.
