Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 1st, 2009

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

So that I'm clear on this, do you feel it would be a good idea to hold a plebiscite in conjunction with a provincial election, or just use the same infrastructure available for a provincial election?

[Lowell Croken]

I'm going to answer yes to both, depending, of course, on what the question is. If it's a question that the politicians would be involved in, it would probably be difficult to do them both at the same time. For our proportional representation plebiscite, the political parties did not get involved. It was kind of done in the public forum. That worked for that particular plebiscite.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Essensa.

[Greg Essensa]

Based on our limited experience in Ontario with referendums, there's no question that there's a significant cost savings to be incurred by running them conjunctively.

The issue we really incurred in Ontario, though, was perhaps caused by the actual question asked. The message was extremely difficult to get out to the electorate. There were challenges in combination and in some of the public education campaign. Although we were able to get the message there, it was always in a competitive aspect with the mainstream media.

I know my counterparts in Quebec have alluded to the idea that depending on the nature of the question, any emotional issue that would resonate with the electorate may actually ultimately determine whether you would do it independently or in conjunction with a general election.

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

Do I have a small amount of time left, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You've got a whole minute.

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

I'll come back to Mr. Croken. I was interested in your comment that in a plebiscite held back in 1913, about 90% of rural folks rejected opening provincial roads to automobiles. I'm wondering how long that lasted.

[Lowell Croken]

Back then I think it was just an expression of interest, and vehicles did come to Prince Edward Island.

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

That's why they needed the bridge.

Thank you for that.

I have nothing more, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Go ahead, Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank our guests for being here this morning.

Mr. Blanchet, the committee's study is in response to the recommendation by the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Mr. Mayrand, that the federal Referendum Act be modernized. One of the reasons for doing this is that he sees a major difference between how the Elections Act and the Referendum Act are administered. So when the two may apply at the same time, it creates a problem.

If I understood correctly, you said that the appendix that governs referendums, in Quebec's Referendum Act, is updated every time the Election Act is amended. So it has been aligned fairly rigorously, up to 2006, when debate began in the National Assembly about reforming the electoral system.

Could you tell us what the benefits would be of aligning the federal Elections Act and the federal Referendum Act as far as possible?

[Marcel Blanchet]

I'm glad you have asked the question and I hope I will have an opportunity to answer it for the parliamentarians in the National Assembly as well.

The Referendum Act contains an appendix that sets out the provisions of the Election Act that have to be changed for holding a referendum. The Act provides that the Chief Electoral Officer has to produce a special version of the Election Act when a referendum is held. That special version contains the Referendum Act and the provisions incorporated into the Election Act for holding a referendum. Obviously, every time the Election Act is amended, we have to make sure that the same thing is done in the appendix that may be used for a referendum.

At the municipal level, it is in the same legislation, the Act respecting elections and referendums in municipalities. So there is a complete legislative framework in the legislation. Of course, as electoral officer, I would hope that all the provisions that are to govern a referendum would also be in the Election Act. So it is much easier to manage, to administer, and to harmonize, because that's a big job, each time there is a referendum, to take the appendix and make a special version to be used for the referendum. That special version does not have the force of law. So if there is an interpretation problem, for example, you have to refer to the Referendum Act and the appendix. My own recommendation is to put it all in the same act.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

So the federal Chief Electoral Officer's desire to include the Referendum Act within the Elections Act would make it easier to administer it even more rigorously.

[Marcel Blanchet]

It would further be possible to also harmonize the financing rules. That would mean we could make sure there is no problem in holding an election at the same time as a referendum in future, if the rules were properly harmonized.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

I would like to get your opinion about the fact that a federal referendum might be called but some provinces, under the existing act, might take the opportunity to hold a referendum on the same question, under their own legislation, as was done in 1992 at the time of the Charlottetown Accord.

[Marcel Blanchet]

That's a political choice that was made at the time. We were well aware of the difficulty it might have caused. Some people who lived in Quebec could not vote because they had not resided in Quebec for six months. One of the requirements of the Quebec act is that a person must have been domiciled in Quebec for at least six months before an electoral or referendum event is held. So it might have caused a problem. Obviously, that was a rule that Quebec was adamant on. In the case of the 1995 referendum, if the requirement of six months' residence in Quebec before the referendum had not existed, a lot of people might have come to Quebec for the weekend and voted.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

I would like to talk about one aspect of your presentation. You also said that the act requires that the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec produce a booklet distributed to all electors 10 days before the referendum is held. The booklet has to explain the no position and the yes position. I am not completely familiar with the federal Referendum Act, but that seems to me to be an objective measure that electors can rely on.

However, you said that the text is provided by the national yes and no committees, and that it is checked, harmonized and rigorously edited by your office.

[Marcel Blanchet]

That's right. The rules for writing it are decided by the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec. Fairness in the presentation of each of the two camps has to be ensured. I have an example here. I don't know whether you want me to file it with the clerk. You can have a look at it.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Do you think this is an important measure that could be adopted in the federal Referendum Act?

[Marcel Blanchet]

It is worth considering. It is a way of informing the debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Great.

Mr. Christopherson, it's good to have you back again.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair. You don't need to say that each time. I'm assigned to this file.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

No, but I still love having you here.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, I appreciate it very much, Mr. Chair.

[An hon. member]

Feel the love, David. Feel the love.