Evidence of meeting #30 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Yes. I'm not trying to discount those isolated incidents--exactly.
As my last question—this has been put on the table a little bit—do you still stand by the certification of the election results in the ridings across the country?
11:40 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Absolutely--unless a court determines otherwise, yes. I certified those writs when they were returned, and I stand by those certifications as we speak.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Thank you for coming to give testimony. It is very interesting. The scope of this investigation is quite extraordinary. Has there been an investigation of such magnitude recently? We are talking about 200 ridings, 250 files, 800 well-founded complaints and 40,000 Canadians expressing concerns. Is this a first?
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
What is the difference between a well-founded complaint and the concerns expressed by 40,000 Canadians? Where do you draw the line?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Those 40,000 people are what we call contacts. They are people who contact Elections Canada to express their concerns vis-à-vis the whole situation. In many cases, they are asking that the act be amended. People are making all kinds of requests and suggestions along those lines. As for the 800 complaints, they are specific allegations about calls that voters received.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
You said that, if there were criminal prosecutions, the reasonable doubt test and other factors would have to be considered. That is completely normal. Is there any hope that those 800 complaints will prove that there was an election fraud beyond a reasonable doubt?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
You are talking about well-founded complaints, but these are complaints that we have received and that we have to review and investigate, depending on the circumstances. For criminal convictions, the allegations have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
There must be criteria to determine whether a complaint is well founded. What are the criteria?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
These are offences set out in the act. We are basically talking about interference with an elector's right to vote.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
What would be considered evidence? We often talk about calls. So we are talking about verbal elements. In that case, what makes a complaint valid? What criteria will it be based on? Is there something written? Are there affidavits? What tools are you using?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
We have received some affidavits, which I have seen, but that is obviously all part of the investigation. It is up to the commissioner to make sure that he has all the facts he needs to conclude whether a complaint is founded or inadmissible. After the investigation, if he is convinced that he has enough facts to prove an offence, as I said, he will have to report to the director of public prosecutions who will decide whether or not criminal charges are appropriate.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Have you received or seized documents from political parties?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
To my knowledge, we have not seized documents from political parties, but, once again, that is up to the commissioner.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
So you are handing that over to the commissioner.
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Only the commissioner can go after documents.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
As we saw in various media reports, documents have demonstrated to the court that some information came from third parties. I would like to point out that those orders don't mean that people who provide that information are under investigation. That is an important distinction. They are third parties who have information that might be valid for the investigation and that has nothing to do with whether they are under investigation or not. Actually, it is the other way around.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
We have received some letters and information from NDP representatives.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I'm sorry, Monsieur Toone, but you're over your time. Thank you.
Mr. Albrecht, four minutes.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to you and your colleagues, Mr. Mayrand, for being with us today.
In your report on the 41st general election, you state, in the very first couple of pages, “...I can say with confidence that the election proceeded smoothly and that Canadians were presented with an accessible electoral framework that they could trust and use”.
Today at the conclusion of your remarks you said, “We all have a role in preserving trust in our electoral process”. You said, “This includes not only Elections Canada but...the electors themselves, the candidates, the [political] parties, and also the media”.
I am confident that every person around this table is concerned about protecting the integrity of our electoral system. I can say with confidence that every person around this table—including those on this side—is very hopeful and is reassured to hear your comment today that Elections Canada does in fact have the resources to complete this investigation.
I just need to point out—and I know that all of us around this table know this already—that during the writ period, every candidate goes door to door: they're knocking on doors, making phone calls, identifying voters. If that contact is made early in the campaign, it's quite possible that someone will indicate overwhelming support on day two or three of the campaign. By week five of the campaign, they may have changed their mind, but that person has been identified as one of my supporters. I will contact...my office will contact that person on election day asking them to please get out and vote. In the event that they've changed their mind in that time, it's possible that they could perceive that to be harassment.
I think it's important that the Canadian public understand that all candidates, or at least most candidates, try to get door to door and phone as many supporters as possible, and that there will be mistakes made—honest mistakes—in contacting voters, who may say at the end, “Well, we weren't even supporting that candidate, and now he's harassing me”.
I think that on balance the number of complaints we're dealing with here—you indicated it again today—is 800. You indicated earlier that there are 70,000 polling stations. Am I correct in that? There are roughly 70,000 polling stations...?