Evidence of meeting #16 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was democracy.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Matthew Lynch  Director of Parliamentary Affairs, Legislation and House Planning, Privy Council Office

11:15 a.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

The whole minute.

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

Okay, Mr. Scott.

February 13th, 2014 / 11:15 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

I was wondering if I could go straight to an issue that's caused some concern, which is current section 18 of the act, which you want to replace with a new version that's very tight, and in its own language excludes any public education activities other than what's listed.

You've suggested some openness. My question is, why would you not be open to retaining current section 18, which has all of the public education functions that have led to things like Democracy Day and the student vote program, and then layer on top of it your specific informational duties that you want the Chief Electoral Officer to undertake? What's wrong with having the two side by side?

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

Clearly, the public advertising and outreach campaigns of Elections Canada have not worked. Since they came into effect, voter turnout has actually plummeted. The problem is even more persistent among the groups that the campaigns purport to help.

I did some research into some of the practical obstacles to voting that exist in Canada and found that many of them are very practical. Of non-voters, 60% say that everyday issues got in the way of their casting a ballot. Those include everything from being out of town on election day to being too busy to cast a ballot. Those are two problems that can easily be solved with advance voting.

The problem is that half of young people are not aware that they can vote in advance of election day. This number rises to three-quarters when you talk about aboriginal youth. As a result, we need to advertise those basics of voting, where, when, and what ID to bring, and what special tools are available to help the disabled cast a ballot.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

Thank you, Minister.

I gave some extra time to answer the question. Be careful on asking those compound questions with two seconds left and not expect me to cut the witness off.

11:20 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

I understand, Mr. Chair, that that was the problem.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

We're going next to Mr. Simms, for seven minutes.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

First of all, Minister, I'm going to start with a compliment. How's that? When the debate started, you were there and you stayed throughout the whole thing. Not every minister does that. I wanted to say thank you for doing that. You put up your argument as best you could.

I want to go directly to the point of what the commissioner as well as the Chief Electoral Officer asked for prior to this bill, which is the ability to apply to a judge to compel testimony. We know that this exists in section 11 of the Competition Act, so it exists on paper. It also exists in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, and Yukon, for their election officials to be able to compel their testimony. To me that seems to be the one key tool they were looking for.

You keep talking about independence. You wanted the independence for the commissioner to do his job, but if he doesn't have the very tool that he asked for, it can't be done. Even though you're taking that person from Elections Canada and putting him into the public prosecutions office, without that key tool, this is an exercise not in independence, but an exercise in isolation. At least when he was with Elections Canada, he could go down the hall and talk to the auditors, he could talk to deputy returning officers all across the country. That was the only way, really, he could find out what's going on. Then they could raise flags, but when the flags were raised, he was within that building, that construct of Elections Canada.

Now, if you want to take that person and put him over into public prosecutions with the very tool to be able to do this, I think that would have been probably the best thing to do. It's not a question of ordering the referee off the ice—you certainly took his whistle from him, which made him ineffective, or you never really gave him a whistle in the first place—but now he is off the ice. Don't you think this is more isolation than anything else?

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

Not at all. In fact, the fair elections act will continue to permit the commissioner to ask information from Elections Canada or any of its officials. None of those powers are removed by the fair elections act, nor does the new legislation prevent Elections Canada from providing information to the commissioner. They can have a free line of communication, one to the other.

The independence we provide is to allow the commissioner—

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

But, Minister, if I may—

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

Perhaps I could just finish answering; it was a very long question. The answer is that the commissioner will have the ability to manage his own staff, run his own investigations, and he can do so without fear of being fired, because he'll have a fixed term for the first time.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

How often has that happened really? I mean, to do his job effectively, obviously he has to be within the confines of this to find out what is going on.

Look at the frustration that happened during the robocalls affair. There was obfuscation. They were blocked. They were so frustrated. This is the very reason he brought it out. I don't think by putting that person into a different office in a separate place.... You say that there is an open line of communication, but there really isn't, unless he has the ability to go after people.

You said that police officers do not have this ability, but your party vehemently argued for the ability to wiretap, to listen in on conversations. Vehemently you defended that. You wanted to make that better. Well, the reason you did that is it gave that person the tool to investigate. Quite frankly, you haven't made him neutral. You've made him neutered without that tool.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the fair elections act gives the watchdog sharper teeth, a longer reach, and a freer hand.

What does that mean? Sharper teeth means tougher penalities for existing offences. A longer reach means that he'll have dozens of new offences to impose. On that particular point—

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Can I address those three things?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

No, because I'm not finished.

The reality is that the commissioner will have a new offence that he can impose, which is anybody who obstructs his investigations or lies to his investigators will be committing an offence under the act, one that can be prosecuted. That will allow him to cut through the obstruction that so worries you.

You raised the issue of police powers to compel. Police do not have that power. Police who are investigating the most heinous violent crimes cannot force someone to speak against their will.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

I just illustrated a point where they did.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

The commissioner has all of the same powers of investigation that a police officer would have.

The commissioner—

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

So why is he wrong when he says he wants more? Why is he wrong? Specifically, why is he wrong?

I only have a few minutes left, Minister. Why is he so wrong for asking what he wants?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

The power that the commissioner has to seek information is already present under the existing act.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Then why did he ask?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

He can ask a judge for a warrant to obtain evidence, and after charges are laid he can ask—

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

After charges are laid. What about before charges are laid?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

The testimony can be compelled in a court of law. That's the way it works when investigators in police investigations carry out their work for much more serious crimes than you're discussing here.

The reality is that he has these tools, and we're giving him more under the fair elections act.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

You have one minute.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Can the police go beyond before charges and do they have the ability to listen in to conversations if they feel that you and I are up to no good? Don't you think that an investigator with Elections Canada—