As far as accessibility to voting stations for electors with mobility problems is concerned, the act sets out that level access must be provided. When that is impossible, special authorization from the Chief Electoral Officer is required. During the last election, out of the 16,000 premises, this permission was granted for only 37, for which there really was no other alternative.
Furthermore, Elections Canada has set out the criteria as to what constitutes level access. In certain situations, we will provide temporary ramps; in others, funds were set aside for the construction of temporary ramps. This is negotiated with the owners of the buildings.
You are quite right to raise these issues. I became aware of several complaints or of correspondence reporting on accessibility problems at times, but also on the quality of the voting stations. This remains a problem. I will no doubt touch on that in the recommendations. Given the timeframe, it is often very difficult if not impossible to get the first choice of premises. One must plan for several possible alternatives, and obviously they are not all of the same quality.
As far as the recommendations on employment insurance are concerned, potential changes to the Employment Insurance Act would no doubt facilitate our recruitment. This is something I would like to see and that I would applaud. I can make such a recommendation to the committee, who in turn could submit it to the government in order for them to make changes to the Employment Insurance Act. Employment insurance rules are part of a much broader context that I am not necessarily familiar with, but anything that would make recruitment easier would be welcome.