Evidence of meeting #26 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 vouching.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
—if they aren't researched here to answer those.
Well, I just want the witnesses to know they don't have to answer every question just because you put it to them.
Thank you, Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Absolutely, but our witnesses can certainly speak for themselves, too.
Mr. Richards.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, after the interruption.
What I would like to do is offer you the opportunity to share with us any other thoughts you have on the bill, but particularly what I would like to ask is this. Are there any specific changes that the bill seeks to accomplish that you feel are positive changes that would be good, and why?
I'll offer you both that opportunity.
Research Associate, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Thank you.
I'd like to make several comments.
The first is that, to be honest, I spent seven years living in the United States. I'm really reluctant to encourage you, in fact, on the contrary, I'd like to discourage you, from learning lessons about American electoral—
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Sorry, I don't mean to interrupt, but by no means am I indicating that we're looking to learn lessons.... I'm just simply indicating that on that very specific point, there was—
Research Associate, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
But that matters. On the very specific point that you cited, on the question of whether voter ID requirements increase or decrease electoral turnout, the evidence from the United States is highly mixed. On average, taken as a sort of collection of evidence, suggests that the stricter the voter ID requirements are, the more they depress turnout. They particularly depress turnout of vulnerable citizens and citizens who move on a regular basis.
I think that evidence is not controversial. You could obviously find an article that states something different, but in general, the evidence from the United States is quite clear.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
In my research, I found a number of articles that have stated otherwise, and I guess we agree to disagree on this particular point. We've already indicated that. However, I don't have a lot of time left, about a minute and a half, so do you have some other, specific items in the bill that you'd like to share with me?
Research Associate, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
I'm happy to say that I think partisan polling is a really bad idea. We already have a system of international best practices, according to which partisans are not involved in selecting senior poll clerks in general, so I think that would be the next thing I would attack.
I think the campaign finance changes that you're recommending to implement are a profoundly bad idea because they increase the influence of money in electoral politics in Canada, something that we are trying to reduce, not increase.
I think the decision to remove the teeth of the electoral commission officer is a really big problem. Perhaps Mr. Quail would like to comment on additional—
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Maybe I'll have to allow him that opportunity because there isn't much time left.
Research Associate, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Absolutely.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Mr. Quail, were there any specific changes in the bill that you'd like to comment on further? For example, the idea of the public registry for those mass calls. Do you have any thoughts on that?
Lawyer, As an Individual
Anything that restricts robocalling, in my opinion, is a wonderful thing. If there's one thing, personally as a Canadian citizen, that I loathe is receiving robocalls. Anything that reduces that junk coming into my telephone, frankly, is a good thing.
I'd like to address a couple of the points you made. First of all, on the question of turnout, it's important to note that the concern about the voter ID is not really something that engages turnout because most people have ID. There's actually only one government-issued document in Canada that meets all of the rules and that's the driver's licence. Most adult citizens in Canada have a driver's licence. Most of us are quite able to vote, despite the rules.
It's about some of the people who might be excluded, and not only marginalized people. I think my wife might complain about my mentioning this, but I vouched for her in the last election. She's a lawyer as well, and I don't think could be considered a marginalized citizen, but she forgot to bring her ID, and that procedure was available, and that worked and was convenient.
Conservative
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
—because I would think in that case, she probably could have gone back to get the information and been able to vote, correct? So she wouldn't be disenfranchised by that.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Mr. Richards, your time for the question is over. We'll let the guest answer the question.
Lawyer, As an Individual
The real problem arises where people, for example, in the poorest part of Vancouver, and I'm sure you're aware of the problems of the Downtown Eastside—and this was part of the evidence we presented in the Henry case—was that one thing people get stolen from them all the time in the Downtown Eastside is ID, because it's a very valuable asset. It can be a scarce commodity among the truly homeless people there. As one of the witnesses said at the earlier panel, people can have messy lives and that's a place where a lot of people have messy lives.
But it isn't only people who are marginalized who are affected, and it should not be difficult to vote.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Mr. Quail, I have to stop you because Mr. Richards’ time is up, and you're really eating into someone else's. Maybe we'll get some points in on the next round.
Mr. Scott, you're next, for seven minutes, please.
NDP
Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Quail, you were about to say you have some current concerns. If you could finish your answer, maybe in no more than a minute, to give me the rest of my time, that would be great.
Lawyer, As an Individual
Sure. I do have concerns about removing the investigative powers and essentially reducing the communication role of the Chief Electoral Officer. I think those are serious problems. An important piece that's missing is the lack of capacity of the Chief Electoral Officer, or whoever is in charge of enforcement, to compel production of documents and compel testimony. Those are serious shortcomings. They're serious in any kind of serious legal process where important rights are at stake and are being enforced. On the one hand, there's a “we don't trust you” attitude towards the electorate, but then there's a bit of a “trust us” attitude when it comes to the other side of the equation that I find troubling.