Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 1st, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Committee, we will get started. We're still waiting for some of our members to come, but they can certainly join us in progress.

We have two witnesses today.

We have Diane Bergeron, the national director, government relations and advocacy, at the Canadian National Institute for the Blind.

Welcome, and thank you for coming today.

We have Kory Earle, former president, former executive director, and lifetime member of People First of Lanark County.

We welcome opening statements from either of you.

Kory, do you want to go first?

[Kory Earle, Former President, Former Executive Director and Lifetime Member, People First of Lanark County]

Just as I was getting some water.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I work in the restaurant business usually, and so I'm always interrupting people just after they have—

[Kory Earle]

That's why you became a politician, right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Yes.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Kory Earle]

Good morning, Chair, and members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. Let me take this opportunity to thank you for allowing us to have the opportunity to address the fair elections act.

My name is Kory Earle. As mentioned, I am the past-president of People First of Lanark County, past executive director for People First of Lanark County, and also an honorary lifetime member. I must say not only do I hold those titles, but I am privileged to represent People First of Ontario as the president, and also as first vice-president for People First of Canada right across Canada.

People First is a self-advocacy organization for people with intellectual disabilities. Our goal and mandate has always been to support our members on issues they face and to fulfill any questions to help governments change policies that change the lives of people with disabilities.

I'll just mention that although I hesitate to take questions, I will do that.

In the meantime I want to take a moment to really thank the minister, Pierre Poilievre, and MP Scott Reid for allowing me and People First of Lanark County to meet prior to this year to talk about this proposed act and provide our input. Certainly our concerns are addressed, I will say with gratitude, in this act today.

We do support some of the fair elections act without any question. However, I do want to say that I do have concerns moving forward with this act, and there are a couple of amendments we would like to see.

I would like to add more thoughts to help make this act stronger for people with disabilities. When this act is passed into law, there should be more added to deal with people who have literacy problems. Of the Canadians with disabilities, 42% face literacy problems to this very day.

This act also needs to be strengthened as we are forgetting that people who have invisible disabilities are being ignored.

There are a couple of friendly amendments I really think this committee should strongly look at. We have heard from members coast to coast across Canada. In fact Quebec brought it to our national board as an amendment, and we're continuing to fight for this amendment to this day.

We're proposing that at the advance polls and on election day, you have the picture, logo, and party on the ballots, or even at the voting station. That, believe it or not, will help many people with literacy problems and people with disabilities. That's a friendly amendment we're pushing for. Our national organization has adopted the resolution to push for that.

We propose another amendment to this act. We understand just this past year that people can get special ballots. This act should talk more clearly about how people can get the special ballots, whether it be during the campaigns, whether it be by holding information sessions to talk about that a lot more. Each MP should inform the people about it as many don't know about the special ballots. We did not learn about the special ballots until this past year, although we encourage people to still come out on advance polls and on election day.

We have a caution for the committee. We applaud the extra advance polling day. People far too often are segregated when it comes to elections. They have anxiety attacks. That's a huge concern among people who cannot be around huge crowds. From working at municipal, provincial, and national elections, I can honestly say there have been improvements, but there's still 90% of work that can be achieved.

Again, together we can work to achieve the best interests of people with disabilities from coast to coast.

This is the quickest speech I have ever done in history, but with all due respect, Chair, I'll be happy to leave it to your questions. I'll pass to Diane.

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Earle. It was a short speech but a good speech, and politicians know that.

Madam Bergeron, would you make your opening comments, please.

[Diane Bergeron, National Director, Government Relations and Advocacy, Canadian National Institute for the Blind]

Mr. Chair, I'd just like to let folks know how I'm doing this presentation so you understand the technology. I'm using a talking computer so I'm having it speak in my ear and then I'm going to repeat it. If the computer stutters, then I also may stutter, so my deepest apologies in advance for that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you as well to the other committee members for this opportunity to offer testimony today on behalf of CNIB.

CNIB, otherwise known as the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, is a registered charity that has been offering vital services to individuals with vision loss for nearly 100 years. We are proud to provide community-based support, knowledge, and a national voice to ensure that Canadians who are blind or partially sighted can have the confidence, skills, and opportunities to fully participate in life. Whether a person is living with a disability like blindness or not, voting is a fundamental aspect of participation in a democracy. However, the ability for Canadians who are blind or partially sighted to exercise this right to vote depends heavily on the way that elections are designed and conducted.

CNIB is pleased to see that accessibility is being raised as an issue for consideration in Bill C-23, and we appreciate the opportunity to offer feedback on how this bill may affect voters with vision loss.

Canadians not only have a right to vote, but a right to vote in secret. The right to a secret ballot includes the right to mark one's ballot in private with no one else knowing for whom one voted. Voters in Canada also have the right to verify their choice to be sure that their ballots were marked in accordance with their wishes and were not spoiled.

Unfortunately, the right to a secret ballot is regularly denied to voters with vision loss in Canada. There are two primary means used to accommodate voters who are blind or partially sighted. First, election acts at all levels provide for registered voters to appoint a designate or election official to assist in the marking of a ballot based on the voter's instruction. However, this approach does not respect the right to a secret ballot. Voters who are blind or partially sighted must tell someone else, potentially a total stranger, for whom they wish to vote. The voter must trust that that person will mark the ballot in accordance with the voter's wishes, will not intentionally or accidentally spoil the ballot, and will keep that choice forever secret.

Alternatively, many election acts, including the Canada Elections Act, require that a template be provided to electors who are blind or partially sighted to assist them to mark their ballots. Unfortunately, this template also does not provide a full and effective accommodation of the right to a secret ballot. Unless they were to show the ballot to another person, voters with vision loss cannot check to be sure that their choice was correctly recorded on the ballot or that they did not accidentally spoil their votes.

The inability of voters with vision loss to exercise their right to a secret ballot is of significant concern to CNIB. Although we are extremely pleased to see that this issue is being brought forward through Bill C-23, this bill as it's currently written does not adequately address this issue.

The appropriate solution to this problem is to make available alternate voting processes such as voting by phone, by Internet, or other accessible electronic means. The ability for the Chief Electoral Officer to test alternative voting processes has been in place since the Canada Elections Act was amended in 2000. To the best of our knowledge, this type of testing has been extremely limited and has not yet opened new opportunities for voters with vision loss to exercise their rights. Bill C-23 would amend the Canada Elections Act to require that the Chief Electoral Officer obtain the prior approval of the Senate and House of Commons before testing an alternative electronic voting process in an official vote.

Considering that the CEO has not exercised the power to test alternative voting processes in the 14 years the option has been available, we fear that this approval process will put more burden on any chief electoral officer who wishes to do so.

We believe it is unlikely that making the process more onerous will result in voters with vision loss finally realizing their right to a secret ballot.

As an alternative to what is proposed in Bill C-23, CNIB recommends that the CEO be required to test an alternative electronic process in the future general election or in a byelection, not merely permitted to do so. Without directing the Chief Electoral Officer to test alternative electronic voting processes, we fear that further decades may pass where voters who are blind or partially sighted are denied their right to a secret ballot in a federal election.

Thank you so much for listening to my comments today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you for your opening comments. We'll go to questions from members. We'll have a seven-minute round in the first round.

Mr. MacKenzie, you're leading us off today.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Chair, I will share my time with Mr. O'Toole.

I'd like to compliment the panel on doing a great job here today.

Mr. Earle, your fears about being able to speak to this group are unfounded. You did a great job and we look forward to hearing more from you.

First, your opening address was interesting in that you mentioned that you did have an opportunity to speak with the minister and MP Scott Reid, so you've had some opportunities on behalf of your organization to have some input. Can you directly see some fruits of that conversation or the advantage to having been there?

[Kory Earle]

Absolutely. Thank you so much for that question.

Again, the minister's availability to make the call and approach us said something about the minister and our MP Scott Reid, for making that approach to move forward.

Our members who came to the meeting were very vocal on issues and they want to see more in the proposed act that deals with disabilities. It's not just an accessibility issue. It needs to be focused on a broad range of disabilities.

We've seen acts come out. We had no problem issuing another statement commending the minister and commending Scott Reid for taking our concerns forward, and they did. We talked about extra advance poll days. Our executive director Diane talked about the anxiety among people. We had someone in a wheelchair who said, “Look, you talk about all these campaigns, but yet I don't see enough in campaigns to get me to want to vote. I'm not excited about elections.”

It is a democracy. I think to deny someone with a disability shows a lack on the part of any government to ensure that they vote. There has to be some outcome. Absolutely. We are proud of that. Are they addressing concerns? Absolutely. I think these concerns can be addressed by amendments to this bill. You would get our full support if some of these amendments were really taken seriously.

I represent people right across the country who have these concerns. So yes, we're proud of some of these changes as I mentioned and we're proud that the minister, again, has taken that approach. I want to remind people that we didn't approach the minister; the minister's office did approach us.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Good. Thank you very much.

Ms. Bergeron, I'm impressed with your presentation today. I think many of us who do not have the same challenges find it somewhat difficult to project forward. It's great to hear it from someone like you who can address those issues in the sense that it makes it real and we get there.

It was interesting, your take that Elections Canada have had 14 years to develop alternative voting systems, and it hasn't happened. I wonder if you have any view as to why that may not have happened. My understanding is it hasn't been by roadblocks from any government, but it just hasn't occurred. Do you have a view? Do you know if anyone has been in touch with Elections Canada?

[Diane Bergeron]

I think part of the problem from the perspective of people with vision loss is that providing accommodations for people who are partially sighted or who are blind requires technology a lot of the time. Technology in voting becomes quite difficult, especially when we're talking about the Internet. There is some reluctance to go in those directions, because of hackers and all sorts of other issues around making sure that people's votes are private and are accurate. Going into some of the technology does pose other problems. Unfortunately, not having those technologies eliminates our right to that secret ballot.

The issue of the way the bill is currently worded—we actually like the way most of it's worded—it's more permissive; it gives permission for the Chief Electoral Officer to do the testing, but it doesn't direct the Chief Electoral Officer to do it or provide some requirement. It just allows it to happen. Sometimes if it's just allowed, it doesn't become a focus.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. O'Toole.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You have two minutes, Mr. O'Toole.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, both, for appearing. We appreciate your perspective.

Ms. Bergeron, I'm going to focus on something beyond what you described as the secret ballot and how that can be lost for some people who need to be accommodated. Some of the reports we've had before this committee, namely, the Neufeld report, talk a lot about mistakes being made by Elections Canada in the registration of voters prior to going into that ballot area to cast a ballot.

Have you found that people, whether they are blind or they have other disabilities, have actually struggled at that registration stage? Before they even go to cast a secret ballot, have they found the process difficult if they present themselves at the polling station to register and ensure they have the right to vote before casting that secret ballot?

[Diane Bergeron]

Yes, there are various things. Some of the stuff that's happening in Bill C-23 addresses some of those issues, in that it ensures that information provided about getting to polling stations, which poll to vote at, and what that process is, those tool kits about how someone with a disability could vote, is going to be made accessible. That's good news for us.

There is also good information for us in the bill. People with vision loss who have a CNIB identification card can use it as identification at the polling station.

One of the issues, though, for people who are blind or partially sighted is that it's not law that they have to be a registered client of CNIB if they are blind. Many people who are blind or partially sighted are not registered with CNIB, and they do not hold that identification card. Those of us who are blind don't drive, so despite the fact that many people ask me for my driver's licence even with my guide dog at my feet, I inform them that we are not given those. For us to get identification, we need to get it from the registry. The registry often asks us for ID that we don't have.

It becomes a big process for us. Part of it also is around identifying one's location through bills. I have a stack of papers on my table and I don't know what most of them are because most of my bills don't come in Braille. If they did come in Braille, it wouldn't do a lick of good if I took the Braille copy of my phone bill to the polling station, since I doubt anybody there reads Braille. It becomes an issue in that sense.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Would the CNIB be willing to partner with Elections Canada to find better ways to accommodate?

[Diane Bergeron]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you. Perfect.

We'll move to Madame Latendresse, for seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank both witnesses for being here today.

Your input today is really helping us to understand the problems we're studying and the various amendments that could be brought forward to improve the bill.

Under the bill, one of the biggest changes to the Elections Canada Act has to do with the role of Elections Canada as described in section 18. Right now, the Chief Electoral Officer can communicate with the public in a way that will change once Bill C-23 is passed. The changes under the bill...

Can you hear me, Mr. MacKenzie?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Are you hearing it now?

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

Is the simultaneous interpretation working now?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We're testing it now.

I'll not dock you much of this time.

Do we have it now?