Evidence of meeting #106 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Thank you very much.
Mr. Simms, you don't have the full time. There's only four minutes left, but you can have four minutes.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
This is a question about candidates. I've been through five elections. I've met so many candidates, successful and unsuccessful, and there are a couple of provisions within this that would help a lot of people out. One that's very appropriate not just for you but for other people I've met is with regard to child care expenses as well as disability expenses and how it is going to be easier now for candidates, when it comes to claiming up to 90% of these expenses. I think it is long overdue, because I've seen first-hand just how difficult it is for people in this situation.
You touched on the other aspect, too, which is getting people who have disabilities to vote. That's wonderful, and I think that, too, is long overdue. Could you comment on allowing candidates...in those two areas, disabilities and child care expenses?
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON
Certainly. I think this is a fairly important provision, because previously, while you could claim 60% of your expenses for child care or for caring for an individual who requires it in your family, that had to fall within the spending limits of your riding that you had as a candidate, and now that can fall outside. You can use personal funds for this, so it doesn't put you, as a candidate, at a disadvantage compared to another candidate who may not have those expenses. Additionally, you can be reimbursed for up to 90% of those. I think that is quite important for ensuring the diversity of candidates, which we so hope to have in this country.
The other part you mentioned, which I'm very excited about and which I think is actually really wonderful, is an incentive for political parties and candidates to provide material in an accessible format, up to $5,000 per candidate per riding and $250,000 for political parties. This is something we heard about from the accessibility group at Elections Canada. It was very important for them, because they feel in many ways that they are not included when it comes to material, when it comes to advertising, etc., in an election, and they really want to be part of it. I think that is really very exciting.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
The other part that I particularly like is the one that allowed people to vote from home. Just to get further comment from you or the officials, there are further allowances here to allow people to vote at home if need be.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON
Yes, in recognition of PROC's recommendation but also the recommendation from the CEO of Elections Canada, this would allow the CEO of Elections Canada to have more flexibility and more discretion with mobile polls and at-home voting, particularly for individuals who have a disability but also with regard to transfer certificates.
For example, if you have a disability and your polling station is not accessible to you, you have greater flexibility in where you cast your ballot within your own poll. That's something that I think is also very important.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I do.
We've talked about better gender representation in the House. It's a woeful 25% or 26%. We had a bill that was proposed by Mr. Kennedy Stewart, whom you well know. Would you be open to including some measures to encourage parties to run closer to gender parity slates? Your leader, in fact, has chosen to protect incumbents. The assumption would then be that if your party is successful in the next election, we're not going to move much from 25% in the House of Commons.
You didn't move for proportional representation, which we know increases gender representation, so we're looking for some way to see the House of Commons actually look like Canada.
What openness do you have to including elements of Bill C-237 in this elections act?
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON
With regard to Mr. Stewart's bill, I'm not sure that penalizing parties for not running at gender parity or close to gender parity—
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
It just doesn't return as much taxpayer money to parties that don't.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Karina Gould Liberal Burlington, ON
Sure, I just think that a penalty system is not the right way to go with this.
However, what I do think is that if there are creative mechanisms or ideas with regard to increasing more women's participation as candidates, I would be open to those.
I also think that it's about more than elections legislation when we talk about encouraging more women to run for office. I think that the demeanor in the House is certainly one thing that we could be working on more, when we think about women in politics. I think that for all of us as members of Parliament, as leaders in our communities, reaching out to women to encourage them to run is also important. Furthermore, other things we're doing as a government, such as having a gender parity cabinet, reaching out to having more women on boards, encouraging women in STEM, and encouraging women in politics are all good things that we should keep doing.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
It's disappointing. I think this is a creative way. You asked for a creative way. This is taxpayer money that we return to parties. They're not entitled to any of it. Our policies could prescribe a way to encourage women to run. Decorum might be one thing, but if you don't have women candidates, it's very hard to have women MPs.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
We look forward to ongoing dialogue.
We're going to suspend for a moment to change the witnesses here.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Good afternoon. Welcome to the 106th meeting of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
Mr. Sutherland and Ms. Paquet will be joined by Jean-François Morin, Senior Policy Adviser, for the next portion of today's meeting.
Thank you all for being here.
Just so the committee knows, we have recently received two documents from the department, the elections modernization act, and this little one here is the clause-by-clause.
Blake, have you read this yet? It came this morning.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Okay, good.
We just got something on the bill by email from the Library of Parliament.
Do you want to explain what you just sent us?
4:40 p.m.
Andre Barnes Committee Researcher
I believe that will only be half of the briefing note that we prepared for the committee. Due to its length, translation is sending it to us in chunks, so you can expect more.
4:40 p.m.
Committee Researcher
Our apologies. We were expecting to meet on Tuesday, not Monday, so we were gearing up to have it for tomorrow.
