Evidence of meeting #124 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 election.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Is there any further discussion?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Turning to CPC-29, the Chief Electoral Officer can authorize identification, but this would put in a caveat to that: "other than a notice of confirmation of registration". Do you want to explain this, Stephanie?
10 a.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
Sure. This essentially just goes back to a voter information card not being an acceptable form of ID. Even with supplementary identification, we're very concerned that someone could just go and get a library card or a Costco card and use it as a supplementary form of identification. We just don't see it as acceptable that the voter information cards are used in addition to the examples from the media yesterday, which I brought up. I mean, the government seems to be against this safeguard entirely. I don't think there's anything I could say to persuade the members otherwise.
I think we've made it very clear that from the position of the official opposition we're very concerned about the legitimacy of the electorate. This piece is probably the most important piece relevant to what we see as safeguarding the legitimacy of the electorate.
That's all I have to say, Chair. As I said, I don't think there's anything that I or any of my colleagues could say at this point to sway the government away from what we see as perhaps an unsafe practice for democracy here in Canada.
I will leave it at that.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Even though you don't think your colleagues can convince the Liberals, one of them is on the speakers list.
Before we go there, there are a number of amendments coming up that deal with this.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Hopefully this discussion will resume when we get to those other ones and we won't discuss it all over again.
10 a.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
It's not just the government. It's the Chief Electoral Officer. We even brought in the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario, and the Conservatives asked him about this practice. It's a perfectly valid practice.
What the Conservatives are looking to do is potentially disenfranchise about 130,000 people—I think that is the evidence we heard, what it worked out to be the last time under the Fair Elections Act—because there may possibly be electoral fraud, even though we have no confirmed cases. Witness after witness was asked to confirm to us a case of electoral fraud, and no one could bring forward a confirmed case.
The Conservative Party is looking for a solution without a problem. We want to make sure that those 130,000 Canadians who weren't given a chance to vote last time around are given a chance to vote. This is something that has been recommended by chief electoral officers across the country, and we will oppose the attempt to bring back the Fair Elections Act.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Here's just a follow-up to that 130,000 number. I would just note that the study actually showed that 7% more people who responded to that survey said they voted than actually voted in reality, so there's an ability to take that with a grain of salt.
I would just point out, though, regarding the voter information card in the last election, that more than 900,000 of those cards were sent out with inaccurate information. It's a question of accuracy and having the right information. That's why we don't feel it's appropriate as a form of identity.
10:05 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
The evidence I was looking for was whether this was a problem of voters voting early and often and attempting to corrupt the system by using this piece of identification. The evidence we heard back was “no”. An inaccuracy could be the difference between “apartment 1A” and “apartment 1B”, and this is somehow pumped up to say that somebody is voting fraudulently, when that is clearly not the case.
I rely on our chief electoral officers across the country, and they've repeatedly told us that this is a practice that is used, and used well, particularly for low-income and transient Canadians. There are circumstances and times when this is the best and most available piece of identification, so we need to be able to trust it. If there are inaccuracies that are concerning, then we can certainly talk to Elections Canada about getting better at that.
We know that about 8%, 9%, 10% of the population moves every year, on average, and some parts of the population move a lot more frequently than others, so I wouldn't want to see anything that tells low-income or younger Canadians that we're not interested in their voice come election time because they're not settled enough to have an ID with the right address on it.
There's a piece around using electricity bills and hydro bills and such, which also has some discriminatory effects, particularly against women. If they're in a relationship where their name is not on the bill, which has been a historical practice in this country and others, and people tell them to just bring in a bill, sometimes that doesn't satisfy either.
Why not use something that the federal government prepares and sends to every elector, something that electors can walk in with?
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Just for the record, you can't vote with just the voting card. You need another piece of ID.
10:05 a.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
I wanted to add to Mr. Cullen's comments. I believe that in many cases there is no intent of fraud, but the reality is that new residents are receiving these cards allowing them to believe that they have the privilege to vote in the election, when in fact they do not. Regardless of whether or not there is fraudulent intention, these individuals are receiving these cards that give them what I think is the fair understanding that they have the right to vote, which is not the case. However, in signing them up on the voter registry, we are presenting them with the opportunity to do that.
While I don't necessarily believe that it is with fraudulent intentions, I do believe that it is happening nonetheless, as a result of these cards being distributed by Elections Canada, with the unintended consequence of these new Canadians, new residents to Canada, completing them and submitting them with the opportunity to vote as a result.
Thank you.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
As I mentioned yesterday, the only piece of federal ID that doesn't cost anything and has your address on it is the VIC. It's the only one that exists. The only thing you get for free provincially is the health card. The only things every Canadian has for free is the VIC and the health card, which meet the requirements to vote.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
It's disappointing to see the Conservatives come back to the same argument from yesterday: “A journalist told us this”, the journalist being Candice Malcolm. Mr. Graham completely debunked that yesterday by reading the Elections Canada piece—that it's not supported and it comes from a place of fear. It's unfortunate to see this dog whistle politics play out through our democracy in an attempt to disenfranchise some of the most vulnerable people in Canada. It's just unfortunate and we can't support it.
10:10 a.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
I think the journalist who was mentioned wrote the article because she was contacted by not one but several members of Parliament who had received inquiries from concerned new Canadians in regard to having received these cards. This is not a journalist coming up with a story of her own accord. It was the result of her having received information from new residents to Canada about information they had received incorrectly and inappropriately from the Government of Canada. These are the straight facts. These people, who should not be on the voters list, received these cards in an attempt to get them to sign up on the voters list. That's just information that was provided to the journalist. It could have been any journalist. It was that journalist, but these actions did occur.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Is there any further discussion? Are we ready for the vote on CPC-29?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
On CPC-30, I have two comments. One is that it also applies to CPC-33, which is on page 57, if you're looking for it. The other is that if this happens to pass, CPC-31 cannot be moved, as they amend the same line.
I'll go to Stephanie in a minute.
It seems to eliminate the declaration vouching option, and I think there are a number of amendments related to this. As per the last discussion we just had, if we can fight this out now, when all the other ones come up, we can come to whatever conclusion we come out with on this one.