Evidence of meeting #113 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 recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
It can be suppression, or intentionally excluding certain voters who are maybe less likely to vote for you, so not worth your time.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Thank you, chair.
I have some quick questions for the three of you based on what I've heard thus far. I'll go to Mr. Roberts first.
You have been talking about the paradigm you're in, prior to C-76 and prior to C-23, and I've seen a lot of the issue campaigning you have done from the CLC. I have been involved in it, as a matter of fact, not just because I'm left of centre, but because I've liked quite a bit of it.
If you notice now, we're shifting things here towards election activity, election advertising, and election surveys. The middle one, election advertising, I get. It's the other two, the activity and the surveying information you get from the activities you do. What do you do in your organization that would be captured under those two headlines?
11:50 a.m.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress
As I understand it, the definition of partisan activity is now regulated, insofar as it promotes or opposes the candidacy or election of a particular party or candidate, but not insofar as it's speaking to an issue with which that party or candidate is associated. There is some attempt to carve out the issue-focused political work that might be considered political activity but not partisan activity, if you follow me.
With respect to survey undertakings, as I understand it, the focus is on election surveys that are used to inform decisions that are partisan in nature, subsequently.
Our primary concern is to preserve the space to engage on the issues, while understanding and appreciating the need to regulate political partisan spending. I want to quickly flag here what I think is, ironically, the largest concern that we should all have with respect to the undue influence and unbalanced influence in political life and discourse. That is the increasing inequality of income and wealth that leads to a concentration of economic and political power amongst groups that can then sway voters on democratic debate and elections. One only need look at the United States.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Are you talking about general organizations or are you talking about political parties?
11:50 a.m.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress
I'm talking mainly about third parties in political life.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Your concern is that the richer ones cannot be captured by what we're trying to do here, when it comes to third party spending?
11:50 a.m.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress
All of what I just said was to underscore our position that we understand and appreciate the need to regulate third party political engagement.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
As long as we don't get into the issue-based activities that you do.
11:55 a.m.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress
That there is as much space preserved as possible for that kind of political engagement....
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Are you getting the space here? Just between you and me, of course.
11:55 a.m.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress
From the CLC's perspective, there are things to appreciate in the bill. I do think the committee does need to look at and very carefully reflect on the amount of space provided.
In terms of the spending limits, the CLC doesn't typically come close to the spending restrictions, but there are a lot of reporting requirements which really are far more extensive than other participants in the process.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
I'm glad you ended with spending limits, because that leads me to my question for Ms. Zwibel about the spending limits.
I'm sorry if I'm paraphrasing this wrong, but you talked about the arbitrary nature by which these limits are imposed. We have heard a lot of evidence that Mr. Roberts just gave, which is that we don't get close to those limits. What's your reaction to that?
11:55 a.m.
Director, Fundamental Freedoms Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
It's true that some groups don't get close to those limits.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
For us, so far, it is most groups. Go ahead.
11:55 a.m.
Director, Fundamental Freedoms Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
We've been living with these limits for over a decade now, so it's hard to know what would happen if there was more space. Look at the Harper case and some of the facts that the dissent put forward. I mentioned one, that you couldn't run a single-day ad in national newspapers. With the constituency limit, you couldn't actually send out a bulk mailing to everyone in certain constituencies. Those are the kinds of metrics I think we need to be looking at when we're trying to set some of these limits.
I appreciate that there are concerns about groups that may coordinate, or that there's the potential for third parties to overtake the space that political parties operate, but I think right now the balance is too much in the other direction. Political parties and candidates are able to dominate the discussion, and there isn't that effective space for third parties. The definition that incorporates this issue-based advocacy is problematic, and I think it's problematic not just for those who need to be governed by it but also for those who need to enforce it. To expect the Chief Electoral Officer to understand what issues are on the table for every candidate and party—that's a pretty significant undertaking.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
I think I see what you're getting at. I wanted to ask a follow-up, but I can't right now. I don't have a lot of time left.
Professor Dubois.... Is it Dr. Dubois?
11:55 a.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Yes.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
It's Dr. Dubois. Okay.
Mr. Cullen stole my question. I shouldn't say he stole it, because he was thinking as I was thinking that if Facebook and Twitter were in front of you, what would you ask them? I remember from years ago, whether it was back in the 1990s or the early 2000s, this term called “truthiness”. It's a fact but it's only half the story, which later becomes the full story to some people. How do you police that?
For me, that was the biggest problem I had to deal with as a politician. When people come to me now with Facebook and say, “How dare you think this”, I'm like, “Well, no, I don't.” Then I'm asked, “But is this true”, and I have to say, “Yes, that's true, but...”, and it goes from there. The manipulation of the story scares me, and the proliferation of this.
As a general question, what do we say to a social media platform that to me seems to be shrugging their shoulders as if it's just a buyer beware kind of thing?
11:55 a.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I think it's important to recognize that there are things that are kind of on the periphery. Is this appropriate or not? Is this legal or not? Then there are things that are very clearly not appropriate and not legal.
I think the question of what is socially acceptable or morally acceptable is an existential one that probably goes beyond the discussion of this bill. Questions of things like voter suppression and telling people things that are blatantly untrue are very clearly not in line with what should happen in an election process. These companies need to recognize that even if the solving-all-the-problems idea is not a switch they can flip right now, they can build in, reasonably quickly, approaches to dealing with the things that are obviously and blatantly against the law.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Is it a five-minute intervention at this point?
Noon
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I'll start by taking a tiny bit of issue with my colleague Scott. I think this will actually be useful.
I interpret the term “truthiness” as meaning not part of the truth that leads in the wrong direction, but rather the presentation of something that is, while not factually true, morally true; that is, it ought to be true. If you disagree with that ought statement, then you are reduced in your moral stature.
It's a way of shifting a debate from the left hemisphere of the brain to the right hemisphere of the brain as a way of mixing up your audience.
