I am Samara's research manager and an acting director at the organization. Samara, for anyone who doesn't know, is an independent non-partisan charity, working to improve political participation in Canada. I'm joined by my colleague, Mark Dance, who is providing some social media coverage of the committee today.
Today I'd like to discuss the context for Samara's support for e-petitions, as well as make suggestions for the committee's consideration. Yesterday, Samara submitted a written brief to the clerk of the committee that provides some greater detail about some of our suggestions. I understand that the text needs to be translated and then will be provided to committee later this week.
The House of Commons belongs to Canadians, yet public opinion suggests that Canadians increasingly see themselves as removed from the work that happens here on their behalf. E-petitions, we think, offer a really promising starting point for Parliament's improvement and innovation in the 21st century, in part because petition-signing is already a very common activity among Canadians.
In a recently published paper by Samara, we examined 20 different ways Canadians participate in politics beyond voting. We found that over half of Canadians, 51%, said they'd signed a petition in the last year. Importantly, these rates of petition-signing were similarly as high for the 18- to 34-year-old age group at 49%.
We're supportive of e-petitions because a well-designed system can do three things. First, it can ensure greater access for Canadians to Parliament's petitioning process. Second, it can help MPs better understand what issues are of concern to Canadians. Third, the implementation of an e-petition system would send a really much-needed signal from MPs to Canadians that they are willing to take steps to improve Canada's democratic process at a time when citizen satisfaction with the way democracy works has been falling.
So what are some considerations for a well-designed system? Samara has identified four points. First, ensure that openness, participation, responsiveness, and consistency are core principles as you design the petition process. This really may sound simple, but it's worth emphasizing how important it is to imagine that you are standing in the shoes of a citizen who will interact with the e-petition process and rules.
In practice, for example, this means taking steps to help ensure that signing a petition is a simple process, particularly given that research has shown that the first 10 hours after a petition launch are the most critical for gaining public momentum.
The second recommendation focuses on how we will deal with petitions as a Parliament. I suggest considering a role for a committee or committees to consider petitions as well. Among legislatures that have been introducing e-petitions as of late, including Scotland, Wales, in Australia, Queensland and Tasmania, and in Canada, Quebec and the Northwest Territories, none of them apply a signature threshold to launch a debate in the legislature directly.
I think it's important for the committee to consider why that is the case, why they've chosen to make those decisions as an appropriate response to petitions.
Third, it's really important to be able to clearly communicate to Canadians how e-petitions will be used and to see this as an opportunity to remind Canadians of the way they can express their ideas to members of Parliament through petitions and other means. For example, building on Dr. Fox's point, it is really important to minimize the risk of public disillusionment when petitions, electronic or otherwise, do not have an immediate or significant impact on legislation. This means helping set an appropriate level of public expectation where e-petitions are concerned.
Fourth and finally, e-petitions can be another tool for MPs to understand their constituent's concerns. In our exit interviews with former members of Parliament, a frequently cited challenge is that they don't necessarily have the easiest way of understanding what their constituents are most concerned about. They generally rely on citizens coming forward and contacting their office through correspondence, or go out to local events to gather opinions. Could citizens, upon signing, have the chance to notify an MP that they care about a petition issue? Or alternatively could MPs receive an automated report once or twice a month that advises on the number of constituents who have been signing petitions and on what issues? These are some of the sort of out-of-box examples that might be of interest to committee and provide further value-added for the investment you hope to make on an e-petition system.
Samara is happy to serve as a resource to all parliamentarians and political parties, and we hope our oral presentation and brief will provide some valuable ideas for members of the standing committee as they deliberate M-428.
Thank you so much.