Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 24th, 2011

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Were you or your colleagues consulted by Elections Canada?

[Victor Cayer]

We were never consulted.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Where do you think these changes come from?

[Victor Cayer]

I don't know at all. No one ever contacted me and I don't believe the members of my commission were consulted. The first time I was consulted was when I was invited to testify here.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

All right.

Do you understand the logic behind the shorter periods? Do you know how Elections Canada justifies that?

[Victor Cayer]

I have no idea.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

You're asking us not to change that. Is that correct?

[Victor Cayer]

That's correct.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

However, there are other, shorter periods that don't trouble you. So I repeat my request. It would be very good if you could put the three exact objections in writing.

[Victor Cayer]

I will be very pleased to send them to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

That would be great if you could, through the clerk.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Let me tell you we have very little time.

[Victor Cayer]

I have no objection in that regard. It will be very quick.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Thank you very much, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Lukiwski.

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

Thank you.

I need to clear up a bit of a misconception when we're talking about timelines, M. Cayer. I don't think the 30-day timeline you referred to is completely understood, because that's not an absolute. In other words, as the Chief Electoral Officer informed this committee, all commissions have the ability to extend the timelines as they see fit. So we're not talking about a rigid 30-day timeline.

Secondly, the intention of the 30-day timeline was to allow people to submit their intentions to make an intervention, correct?

[Victor Cayer]

Yes.

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

So let's make sure that we're all onside with that.

I think that's a big change from what the impression was around this table. Based on what I've just said, which you've agreed is the case, I believe there is adequate time.

Secondly, in response to a question by Monsieur Dion, I would point out that even though you may not have been consulted personally, the former Chief Electoral Officer, Mr. Kingsley, who wrote a report after extensive consultation, said these timelines were the ones that were recommended after consultation. It's unfortunate, perhaps, that you weren't personally consulted, but Mr. Kingsley did indicate to this committee that there was extensive consultation with the people involved in the process. From that I can only take it that he consulted some of the commissioners other than you. And the recommendations put forward in that report were also supported by the current Chief Electoral Officer, who said that he would be able to achieve all that was necessary with respect to Elections Canada's work within the timelines proposed in Bill C-20.

I'd like to get your comment on that, please.

[Victor Cayer]

People will definitely ask to have that period extended, but that will change absolutely nothing. Why shorten a period when you can always extend it in any case? I wonder why these people wanted to shorten it and enter that in a very specific framework. That's not a problem in smaller provinces, but it's another story in Quebec.

When I worked on the commission in Quebec, we had to extend the period in any case. I don't know where the Elections Canada people got that idea. They have criteria, of course, but the fact remains that, at some point, we had to move fast because they were pushing us. Did they want to shorten the periods for those reasons? We had to put the pedal to the metal so we could meet the deadlines.

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

Again, I would simply point out that the current Chief Electoral Officer felt that he would be able to achieve all of the work required to meet the election timelines in 2015. He suggested that any undue delay would jeopardize that work.

[Victor Cayer]

I believe that Elections Canada absolutely wants to implement the new bill in the context of the election schedule for 2015. So they're shortening the periods based on that. You can imagine that, if the commission is allowed to extend that period by itself, certain commissions may not have the time to finish their work.

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

Let's be clear. The extension is not to the seven-month timeline the commission has to present the first draft. It is merely the extension of a 30-day timeline for submissions by intervenors.

[Victor Cayer]

The commission's role is to hear people. So they have to be given as much latitude as possible for that purpose. You have to open the doors and ensure that people are heard. When they are, they're happy, even when they're not right. That's important.

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

I agree, but my point, sir, is that I have quite great confidence in the commissioners, that if they know they have a seven-month deadline, any extensions they give would be designed in such as way that they would still be able to do their work within the seven months.

[Victor Cayer]

I'll tell you right away that that subject is not my responsibility. It's political. Here I'm telling you about the work we have to do, not the intentions of the people in the ridings.