Evidence of meeting #125 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.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Trevor Knight  Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Elections Canada
Jean-François Morin  Senior Policy Advisor, Privy Council Office
Anne Lawson  Deputy Chief Electoral Officer, Regulatory Affairs, Elections Canada
Stephanie Kusie  Calgary Midnapore, CPC
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Andrew Lauzon
Jennifer O'Connell  Pickering—Uxbridge, Lib.
Linda Lapointe  Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, Lib.
Manon Paquet  Senior Policy Advisor, Privy Council Office
Philippe Méla  Legislative Clerk

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Mr. Morin.

3:35 p.m.

LCdr Jean-François Morin

Thank you, Mr. Nater. I understand that, but at proposed paragraph 283(1)(b) in this proposed section in the bill, there is the part you are proposing to change, which adds “in respect of each ballot box”. Then we go to proposed paragraph (b), which currently says:

(b) any candidates or their representatives who are present or, if no candidates or representatives are present, at least two electors.

Is it, then, your understanding that at least two electors, in the absence of candidates or representatives, would need to attend the counting of the votes for each ballot box in a polling station?

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

What we're saying is that there would be two witnesses for each ballot box rather than for each location. The first part comes into play as well, but in the top part we're just clarifying that it's “each ballot box”, and then (a) and (b) would apply to that.

That's as clear as mud.

3:40 p.m.

LCdr Jean-François Morin

Thank you.

Unless I'm contradicted by my colleagues here, within the modernization of the voting initiative proposed by the Chief Electoral Officer, this would include an additional burden of finding at least two electors to stay for the entirety of the counting of the votes. This is just a practical comment on the effect of this amendment.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Does Elections Canada want to chime in on that?

3:40 p.m.

Anne Lawson Deputy Chief Electoral Officer, Regulatory Affairs, Elections Canada

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're very happy to be here today, and we're always responsive to your request to appear before this committee.

I will say, however, that not having expected to be here for clause-by-clause, we have not had a chance to review all of these amendments. We're looking at them as we're here and are trying to understand them and react.

I'm still not sure that I fully understand the import of this amendment. It doesn't strike us off the top as being a problem, in the sense that we are obviously going to count all of the ballot boxes at the polling station regardless. I'm not sure whether this is meant to add a burden or whether it is just to clarify that each ballot box needs to be properly counted.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Having the presence of two electors is what's being proposed. Is there a circumstance in which ballots can be counted without a representative from the parties or an elector present? Could it be just Elections Canada's officials alone?

3:40 p.m.

Deputy Chief Electoral Officer, Regulatory Affairs, Elections Canada

Anne Lawson

It could not be, currently.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

So that scenario doesn't happen?

3:40 p.m.

LCdr Jean-François Morin

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm saying this from memory, but I think this was a change brought by Bill C-23. Prior to Bill C-23, there was a maximum of two electors who could attend the vote in the absence of representatives, but we'd have to confirm that.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I wonder whether we can circle back to this one, to allow Elections Canada some time to go through it. Would that be helpful? Is it consequential, Chair? I know we sometimes pause amendments to give witnesses a moment to collect thoughts.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Is it okay with the committee?

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

It is unless there is a sequence that puts us off.

3:40 p.m.

Stephanie Kusie Calgary Midnapore, CPC

Yes, I think it's fine. I don't think it's consequential.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

The next amendment we'd have to hold off on as well, then, because they tie together.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Is that CPC-71?

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Is it amendment CPC-69?

We did CPC-69.

We'll stand down clause 191 with all of its amendments. We'll come back to the clause later.

Is that okay with the committee?

October 16th, 2018 / 3:40 p.m.

Liberal

David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Just don't forget.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

We'll try to do it at the end of the meeting today.

(Clause 191 allowed to stand)

Okay, we have new clause 191.1, which is CPC-72.

The vote on CPC-72 applies to CPC-73, which is on page 129 and CPC-75, on page 130, and CPC-78, on page 135, as they are linked by the concept of the ballot reconciliation report.

Can I have the introduction of CPC-72? It's on page 125.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

Mr. Chair, this goes along with the reconciliation report when you're having multiple ballot boxes at a single polling station. In the traditional past each ballot box has been its own polling station and now we're going to have multiple ballot boxes at a single location. This is providing a reconciliation report for each of those locations.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Officials, this is one you've had.

3:45 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

This is a scenario in which we have multiple ballot boxes within one polling place. We're now calling it “polling place”. You want a reconciliation of the entire polling place done at the end of each voting day, where traditionally it was just each individual polling....

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Okay.

In the past, let's say, we had five lineups. They'd each have their ballot box and you could only vote at your lineup. Now you can have five lineups but people can vote at any of them. You could still have five ballot boxes.

This amendment does what to that?

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

It's a reconciliation for it, so that the number of ballots that are present in the boxes reconciles with the number of ballots that are issued for each poll.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Okay. I understand—