Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 13th, 2014

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

That's what I was about to say.

This concerns me because it was a story about Monsieur Mayrand, the head of Elections Canada, who apparently was giving some form of a speech to his employees, the staff members of Elections Canada, and apparently railing against the government and complaining about the fair elections act. The way I read the article, it was almost like a campaign-style speech to rally them up, to get them angry at the government.

I could only interpret that as being, in my mind at least, political activism. I may be wrong, but it certainly appeared that way to me. I want to know whether or not that, if I interpreted it correctly, in your opinion, is appropriate for the head of Elections Canada, which is supposed to be impartial and deal with all political parties and all candidates impartially. Would you think that was appropriate?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Listen, I don't take these things personally. In politics emotions can run high from time to time. I haven't read the speech, so I won't comment on its substance.

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

Okay.

Now maybe I can get back to a question on the provisions themselves.

One of the complaints or the criticisms that the NDP opposition has is on the plans to take away vouching and do away with the election ID card. They feel that's going to disenfranchise, I think David said, 100,000 or 200,000 people. Well, there are two options. One is to present a government-issued photo ID with name, such as a driver's licence. That would be the most common. The other is the 39 other options where two of those 39 would be sufficient.

On the driver's licence itself, my colleague Blake Richards pointed out that according to Statistics Canada, less than 2% of the Canadian population does not have a driver's licence. I'm wondering if you want to comment on that. I cannot see, for example, where there would be anyone who voted in the last election who would not be able to vote in this coming election if our new provisions came in. Yet they're saying that we're going to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people. I'd just like your comment.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I have to say there is a startling lack of knowledge in the public about the ID that is required. A lot of very informed people wrongly think that you require photo ID. For example, the leader of the Green Party, who I consider to be very informed on political matters, having run in campaigns herself, was under the impression in a public letter she published recently that one needs photo identification to cast a ballot. In fact, that's not true. It is an option, but not an obligation. Elections Canada provides a second list of eligible identification that includes 39 different options.

This lack of knowledge is important, and it's something we tried to fix in the fair elections act. Through clause 7 of the bill, we are amending section 18 to require Elections Canada to inform people of the forms of identification that are required. The goal is to ensure that people show up at the voting location with all the information that they need, including the ID. I think that will help solve some of these problems.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll go to Madame Latendresse, please, for four minutes.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, minister, for meeting with us today. We appreciate your giving us as much time as possible to ask questions. We have a great many questions for you and numerous topics we'd like to discuss.

I am very concerned about voter turnout among young people. The issue has always been very important to me, and I have a number of questions on it. I paid close attention to most of your comments and speeches in the House. You have often said that the bill you introduced would increase voter turnout among young people. When I hear you say that, I get the sense that I'm in the movie 1984 because that is not at all what the bill will do.

I'm not sure whether you are aware, but in 2011, 62% of students who had the option available used the voter information card when they voted. Now you are taking that option away from them. Students will no longer be able to use the voter information card that the Chief Electoral Officer authorized in 2011 as part of a pilot project.

Do you realize what a negative effect that decision will have on voter turnout among young people?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I want to thank the honourable member for her question, but I disagree that voter turnout among young people will drop, and I'll tell you why.

First off, as she mentioned, young people and students were able to vote for years without having to use voter information cards, and they never had a problem. Second, they have 39 other ways to identify themselves at the polls, including their student cards. There is a long list of options, which I can share with you.

Lastly, the Fair Elections Act would require Elections Canada to advise young people of the pieces of identification they need to vote. And that would help ensure they brought all the necessary documents.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I am already aware of all that, minister. You keep saying that people have 39 options for identifying themselves, but can you tell us exactly how many of those cards can be used, on their own, as the sole piece of ID for voting?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

The 39 I was talking about are—

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I am asking how many pieces of ID can be used on their own at the time of voting.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

It depends on the province, but some examples are driver's licences, health cards and provincial/territorial identification cards.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Is that all?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

That is one option, and no, that is not all. There is another option.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

We know, but what I am asking is—

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

There are 39 other pieces of ID that can be used, and I have the list here.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

When I was a student in Rimouski, I didn't get my driver's licence until much later on. Mr. Lukiwski said that only 2% of Canadians don't a have driver's licence. I was told that 25% of people living in the Toronto area don't have a driver's licence, so it obviously depends a lot on the place in question. And young people are clearly the ones most likely not to have a driver's licence. Many are waiting even longer before getting one.

You said they can use a student card to vote, but that isn't a realistic option for a lot of young people who don't have proof of residence, which means they can't use their student cards as identification at the polls.

I have more questions for you as well.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I will add that that is not the only acceptable piece of ID for students. They can also use correspondence issued by a school, college or university. They do have 38 other ways to identify themselves.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Taking an identification method away from students is not the way to improve their turnout on voting day.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Likewise, continuing to use a method that is not secure is not the way to protect our electoral system.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

We will move to Mr. Richards, for four minutes.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you for being here today, Minister. I have a couple of questions. I hope we'll have time for both of them.

I think we all remember the 2006 Liberal leadership campaign when many of the candidates in that race used political loans to be able to circumvent the donation limits. In some of those cases, candidates in fact still owe money to campaigns that ended almost a decade ago now.

I'm wondering if you could tell us if and how the fair elections act closes that loophole and helps to keep big money out of politics.

Perhaps you could also address whether in fact those provisions in the act would be retroactive, whether they could actually be applied to the individuals who still have debt from those 2006 campaigns, and what Elections Canada might be able to do to force repayment of those loans.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I'd like to begin, Mr. Chair, by putting the present situation in context.

Under the present law, the Commissioner of Canada Elections has the power to investigate anyone who has used loans deliberately to circumvent donation limits. That would be a clear offence under the existing section 497 of the Canada Elections Act.

Elections Canada rightly points out that failure to repay a loan does not necessarily prove intent and therefore is not automatically an offence under the act, although it is non-compliance with the act. However, Elections Canada has all the powers to investigate whether these Liberal leadership contenders deliberately used loans to circumvent donation limits. It remains to be seen whether Elections Canada intends to carry out such an investigation.

That being said, the changes in the fair elections act will close this loophole altogether so that people cannot use unpaid debts to circumvent donation limits. It does this by requiring that borrowers use recognized financial institutions or political parties that have commercial repayment plans and interest rates and by requiring that it become an automatic offence after three years of non-repayment.

That provision is not retrospective. It will not apply to past incurred debts. However, for those who have outstanding debts, we are giving some flexibility in repaying them. They will be allowed to collect donations from previous donors as long as they do not exceed the annual donation limit. Those provisions will be retrospective. In other words, past incurred debts can be reimbursed through this change on the fundraising side.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Okay. Thank you, Minister.

I think most people in this room know that I represent a large rural riding. One of the challenges in some of the smaller communities can be finding appropriate polling stations. The previous returning officer in my riding shared with me that sometimes finding a place where disabled people are able to have proper access to the polling station can be a challenge in some of those communities. One of the changes being made in the fair elections act is one that would require the CEO to communicate with people with disabilities to ensure that they know what voting stations are available to them when they get to the polling station.

Could you tell us a little more about why that is necessary? Perhaps you could indicate whether in fact you met with representatives of disabled individuals to discuss the development of that provision with them and to ensure it was something that would be well applied to ensure that they had proper access and knowledge about where and how to vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

That's your four minutes, so I'm going to ask Mr. Opitz whether the minister can answer the question on his time.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Minister, if you wouldn't mind answering that question, go ahead.