Evidence of meeting #35 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was advertising.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
It will be right after Mr. Christopherson gets to speak, I guess.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Sure.
How in the world will going out and extensively advertising and telling people that there is an election coming up, and here is how they vote, here is where they vote, and here is when they vote possibly be repressing or suppressing the vote? It does not. That has the same impact.
In fact, I would suggest that it has a greater impact because all the studies that the electoral office itself has conducted show that their attempts to motivate people to get out to vote have actually ended up with a decrease in voter turnout. This in effect will be promoting the fact that they need the information to go out and cast a ballot. Elections Canada will be providing that. This does not suppress the vote. It does just the opposite.
Conservative
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Okay, I'm going to try in English. Maybe it will be easier.
My question has nothing to do with what you just said, Tom. I'm serious. I'm asking a fair question. I'm really asking a question I want to know the answer to.
After this amendment passes, under proposed section 17.1, how would the Chief Electoral Officer be able to do a public education and information program for groups other than students at the primary level or secondary level?
This is my question. I'm genuinely asking that question. I want to know the answer.
Conservative
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Okay. If the Chief Electoral Officer wants to go out to address a university class and tell them exactly why he believes an individual should get out and vote, and he tries to motivate them, he can do so. If he wants to go on television at any point in time, or hold a news conference to tell people he believes...he can do so.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Can he put public education and information programs at the university level? Can he?
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
It's too bad the cameras didn't catch all of that going on because at one point, at the last question, Mr. Lukiwski said, “I don't really know”, and that's the whole point.
I'm going to be very brief.
Conservative
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
I never said that.
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I hate it when Mr. Christopherson tries to put words in my mouth. I did not say that.
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
All right, then, answer the question. Put your words in your mouth. Go ahead, talk.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Okay, he said he'd already answered it.
Mr. Christopherson, move on, please.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I will, Chair.
First of all, on the question of whether or not it's suppression, the argument from the government doesn't wash. Currently he can talk to anybody about everything. They were shutting that down. Based on public backlash, the government opened it up a bit and said, “Yes, you know what, there would be a benefit to doing that with primary students and secondary students”, but they're not extending that to everybody else that there were programs with.
It's my understanding—I haven't yet heard a government member say that I'm wrong—that this card in its current format could not be done in partnership with the Chief Electoral Officer under the new law even as amended, even though it could originally.
Since the people who were in partnership with this said that it helped increase the turnout, it's a fair argument to say that if you remove it, the converse is true, and fewer people will vote. That is voter suppression.
Thanks, Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
All right, we're done. Let's go to the vote on amendment G-4.
(Amendment agreed to)
Sorry, I should have said this beforehand, but that negates BQ-1 and LIB-5.
There is a line conflict when we do G-4, and the next two that are on the list.
We're about halfway. We'll suspend for about five minutes, please.
Conservative
