Evidence of meeting #83 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 petition.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

André Gagnon  Acting Deputy Clerk, House of Commons
Jean-Philippe Brochu  Deputy Principal Clerk, Journals Branch, House of Commons
Dennis Pilon  Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, York University, As an Individual
Joanna Woo  Postdoctoral Researcher, Institute for Astronomy, ETH Zürich, As an Individual
Ian Lee  Professor, Carleton University, As an Individual
Michael Pal  Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual

11:30 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

The only thing I would say is that having probably as much experience as others with web projects, no matter how much testing you do, there will be one or two things that are just either not intuitive for the users or an actual technical glitch. So, on the idea of fixing it when everybody arrives and everybody figures it out and finds a problem, you're planning on that, too, obviously.

11:35 a.m.

Acting Deputy Clerk, House of Commons

André Gagnon

Also, we've been lucky in having a lot of exchanges with other assemblies that have had e-petitions, but not in terms of the volume that we have here. We expect there will be a lot of e-petitions being put there. When you think about what they had in Quebec, for instance, there's not a high volume of e-petitions. That's really one of the challenges. In terms of navigating through the e-petitions, the volume is the big issue we're working on. We're quite confident in this regard.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

Mr. Christopherson.

11:35 a.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Thanks, Chair.

Thanks very much. Most people figure it takes forever and everything to turn this ship of federal government. It really needs to be said that it took us a lot longer to get our political ducks in order than it did for you to get the bureaucratic ducks in order. Once we had sorted out what we wanted to do, you were fairly straightforward. It's very impressive. You've done a great job, and I think that's being reflected in all of our comments.

Mine's a very simple question. What role does the House play—your side of what we all do—in educating and informing Canadians that this new democratic tool is available to them? A right that's not known is like a right that doesn't exist. What kind of promotion would you normally do, or would we do, or is there something we need to do to trigger that? We've set up this new wonderful world. Can we have some thoughts on how we let Canadians know it's available to them?

11:35 a.m.

Acting Deputy Clerk, House of Commons

André Gagnon

That's part of the communication plan. As you can imagine, there will be some indications on the website and there will be a statement in the House from the Speaker on this, but more so, we will prepare some information items for members of Parliament to put in their ten percenters, for instance, and on their websites and all of those things. This is part of the communication package we're preparing so that members will have all the tools they want if they want to promote it. As well, inside, on our website and in the House, we'll be able to promote it.

11:35 a.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Does that include some of the promotional material for tours when people come through and get handouts of material? Is that something you would profile for a year or two to get people used to the idea, and again, to disseminate this as broadly as possible?

11:35 a.m.

Deputy Principal Clerk, Journals Branch, House of Commons

Jean-Philippe Brochu

Actually, that's a really interesting and pertinent question. We have been in touch with the Library of Parliament's outreach program and they will be developing tools for the website and also for the different displays.

11:35 a.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

That's great.

Okay, that's my question. Thanks, Chair.

Again, great job, well done. Thank you.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

I'll echo that too. I think the whole committee thanks you. Mr. Christopherson is correct in that sometimes it takes us a long time to get to a place, but oh boy, you turned it into action pretty quickly, so I love it.

I have just one other point. There's a button there that says, “I'm not a robot.” I'd like that on more government forms. We could really weed out the House of Commons and find out who the humans are.

11:35 a.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

We might even thin out the House.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

It may happen.

11:35 a.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

I thank you very much for your time this morning, for promising to give this to us, and for the work you've put into it. I look forward to sitting in my little home office after next October and sending you a hundred petitions a day. I'll be counting on all my friends to sign them, so that's perfect. Thank you very much.

We'll suspend just for.... We have 20 minutes. I don't want to suspend for 20 minutes, so what do we want to do? Sit here and talk about...? I have to leave now. Is it the will of the committee that we do committee business?

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

I'm going to take this break, though, and, Alexandrine, you're going to have to take part in that.

I'll suspend just for a minute while we allow our guests and your chair to leave. Will someone tell me how committee business goes? It will be really important for the chair to know this.

11:35 a.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

11:35 a.m.

A voice

Yes.

Noon

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joe Preston

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[Public proceedings resume]

Noon

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Alexandrine Latendresse

We are resuming our 83rd meeting.

Today, we are continuing our consideration of Bill C-50, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act. The four witnesses will have five minutes each to make a presentation. Afterwards, the members of the committee will be able to ask them questions.

By video conference, we will hear from Mr. Pilon and Ms. Woo. I will give them the floor first, just in case we experience any technical difficulties. We will then go to Mr. Pal and Mr. Lee.

I now give the floor to Professor Pilon.

12:05 p.m.

Professor Dennis Pilon Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, York University, As an Individual

All right, thank you.

Just by way of introduction, as you may know my academic research is focused on voting systems, questions of voter turnout, voter registration, big qualitative but also historical terms. I've also been an academic adviser on an audit of Elections Canada in the 2000s.

I also have a lot of practical experience on elections. I was a deputy district electoral officer in British Columbia, which meant I was second in charge of running a local constituency as the administrator in 1996 and 2001, training 300 people to work on election day, hiring halls to have people come and vote, and all those kinds of details. I have an analysis of this that is both academic but also informed by some practical experience.

As you know from the brief that I submitted, I identified at least three problem areas that I saw with the legislation.

First, it seemed to me that the legislation offers a solution in search of a problem, given that there is no systematic comparative academic evidence that voter fraud is a problem.

Second, I noted an inconsistent application of the rules on the basis of geographic location inside or outside the country in the identification required and the registration processes.

Finally, I felt there was an inappropriate or disproportionate response to the problem, if there is a problem, in terms of the proof of residence required by those outside the country and the onerous registration restrictions. I didn't see how they could be justified in terms of the aims that were put forward about what the government wanted to accomplish with these reforms.

That's just a very brief summary of what I put in my brief here, and I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

12:05 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Alexandrine Latendresse

Thank you very much.

I now give the floor to Ms. Woo.

12:05 p.m.

Dr. Joanna Woo Postdoctoral Researcher, Institute for Astronomy, ETH Zürich, As an Individual

Thank you very much for inviting me to describe to you my experience of voting in Canadian elections from abroad and how Bill C-50 would impact me.

I consider it both a privilege and a responsibility to participate in the democratic process of my country. That's why I'm here before you today, and that's why I have voted in every federal election since I've been old enough to vote, including the elections that were called while I've been away from Canada for educational and professional reasons.

While studying in Israel, I was on the international register of electors and voted a few times from there. To my dismay, I was then removed because of the five-year rule, so I closely followed the Frank case and was thrilled when that five-year rule was struck down last year. Having since taken up a postdoc position here in Switzerland, I started preparing a new registration with my spouse, who is also Canadian.

The instructions on Elections Canada's website, as well as the registration form itself, indicated that the forms should be returned either by fax or by mail, but oddly there was no email option. I first tried the fax machine, but it returned an error message dated July 14, 2014, last year. The next day, July 15, we sent both our applications in the same envelope by snail mail, since there was plenty of time still before the next election.

I didn't hear back from Elections Canada until October 15, in other words, three months later. I have since learned that email registrations are allowed, even though this is not advertised. Had we sent them by email, or had the fax machine worked properly, two or three weeks may have been saved but not months.

The email correspondence from Elections Canada that I received on October 15 indicated that they had received my application and that it was missing my proof of identity. I'm positive we had sent copies of our passports, but it was not a big deal to send them again, especially since this time they indicated we could send them by email.

Within a week, they confirmed by email that they had received our passport copies and added us to the international register of electors. Perhaps we really did forget to include our passport copies, and somehow this caused some months of delay. However, even after they confirmed they had all our documents, while I received my confirmation in the mail within two weeks, my spouse only received his hard copy at New Year's, in other words, two months later.

In total, the entire process until we received physical mail from Elections Canada took almost four months for me, and almost six months for my spouse. When I registered in Israel a few years ago, even though I don't have the exact dates, I also recall that the process was not particularly rapid.

Over the last 20 years, the length of all but one election campaign was less than 40 days. Under the new rules proposed by Bill C-50, we would have to register for every election and only after an election is called. Given the length of the process we experienced, these rules would make it impossible for me and my spouse to vote. In light of this, I implore the committee to find some way to modify Bill C-50 to make it more feasible for us Canadians living abroad to exercise our democratic rights.

Here I offer some humble suggestions that would greatly help us.

First, Elections Canada should make it clear on its website and its registration forms that email registrations are possible and encouraged.

Second, it would be of obvious help if Bill C-50 were changed so that registrations can be sent outside of an election period. If for some reason Parliament feels that we need to register for every election, I think we could live with that, but at least give us ample time to do so. For example, a year in advance of an election may be sufficient, although since elections are sometimes called early, it would be better if we could register any time between elections.

Third, if for some reason this is not possible, it would be a huge help if snail mail were completely removed from the process. Currently, snail mail is required twice: once when Elections Canada sends the voting kit to the voter abroad, and again when the voter sends the completed ballot back. Both of these steps could be removed if we could vote at Canadian consulates and embassies, for example. Other countries, such as the United States and many EU countries, have made such arrangements for their citizens abroad. Many of them even allow voting at their consulates all the way up to election day. I'm sure Canada could make similar arrangements in such a way as to eliminate the delay of snail mail, while still confirming voters' identities and ridings, allowing us to cast a ballot.

In summary, the process that my spouse and I recently experienced in order to register to vote was much longer than the normal length of an election period. Thus, Bill C-50, as proposed, would make it impossible for us to vote.

Canada is my only citizenship and the only country I'm allowed to vote in. I implore the committee to ensure that this is not taken away from me.

12:10 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Alexandrine Latendresse

Thank you very much, Ms. Woo.

The committee members will probably have some questions for you after the other two witnesses have delivered their presentations

Mr. Lee, the floor is yours.

12:10 p.m.

Dr. Ian Lee Professor, Carleton University, As an Individual

Thank you for inviting me to once again address what I have characterized as the most astonishing urban legend in Canadian public policy in the 35 years that I've studied public policy.

This urban legend claims that large, significant, or substantial numbers of Canadians lack any ID whatsoever, thereby disenfranchising them from voting. As a former banker deeply familiar with identification systems, I know that the principle of banking goes back to ancient times of “know thy customer” and is grounded in the idea that you can't collect money from someone if you don't know who it is you lent the money to. Therefore, identity and identification have been at the very core of financial systems for thousands of years, and it's only the rest of society, as we've moved into the digital economy, that is realizing what bankers have always understood.

First, I found that no critic had undertaken a systematic empirical review of all major identification systems in Canada using the government reports of the government departments that issue the ID in Canada: Passport Canada, Transport Canada, and so forth. I presented the empirical evidence of these systems both to your committee and the Senate committee in April 2014, and that became the basis of my op-ed published in The Globe and Mail on May 4, 2014, “Canadians who can't vote because they lack any ID? Don't believe it.”

I testified to you and in the op-ed...and I'm just going to summarize this very quickly.

Canadians possess over 200 million pieces of identification or identification documents including birth certificates, as the vital statistics acts of every province compel the registration of every birth in every province. StatsCan reports 29 million people in Canada were born in Canada, with 6.7 million people foreign born.

In Canada there are 29 million birth certificates. There are 22 million drivers' licences—not the 15 million stated by Mr. Mayrand—per the annual Transport Canada report to Parliament. There are 29 million cars and trucks registered in Canada per the Transport Canada report to Parliament, each with an ownership certificate disclosing name and address. It's the same for insurance certificates, and there are nearly 35 million health care cards, as every province requires a health card to access a doctor, a clinic, or a hospital.

According to StatsCan, 69% of Canadians, or 9.2 million, own their own home. Under provincial law, real estate ownership must be in writing with name and address disclosed. Likewise for rentals, 31% of Canadians rent, and under landlord and tenant acts, the name and address must be disclosed in writing in the tenancy.

Per the FCAC established by Parliament, 96% of Canadians have a bank account, and the Bank Act passed by Parliament requires two pieces of primary government-issued ID to open a bank account.

StatsCan 2013 reports that 17.5 million Canadians filed taxable returns with, of course, name and address, while another 8.9 million Canadians filed non-taxable returns to get the GST rebate and so forth, a total of 26.3 million filers. Per StatsCan, in 2014 two million Canadians boarded planes requiring ID three times: once at check-in, once at security, and once at the gate. Per Passport Canada, 70% of Canadians, or 23 million, have a passport. Per the Canadian Bankers Association, there are 71 million credit cards outstanding in Canada.

I'll wrap up very quickly. As the French philosopher Michel Foucault taught us in 1978 in his astonishing article on governmentality, government departments and agencies have been studying, measuring, analyzing, and collecting data on us over very long periods of time in every area of life in western countries from health care to hospitals, to educational institutions, to penal institutions, to security, to borders, to agriculture, to drug use, to seniors' housing, and on and on.

In other words, and I said this before and I'll say it again to you, it is legally and factually impossible today in Canada to be digitally invisible with zero identity of any kind in any database anywhere. The Frank court decision has added an estimated 1.5 million eligible voters abroad.

I support Bill C-50 as Parliament must act to establish a level playing field with respect to voting in federal elections so that voters abroad vote under the same rules as domestic voters. In summary, in a modern, complex society, identity and identification are absolutely essential. The nostalgia for 19th-century voting systems in a far smaller and simpler time simply does not work.

Finally, to the trust issue, to quote the philosopher Thomas Hobbes, if we all really are angels and never do anything wrong, they why do we lock our doors at night? Restated, why do we need ID to board a plane if none of us are terrorists?

Thank you.

12:15 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Alexandrine Latendresse

I now give the floor to Mr. Pal.