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.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
5:50 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
When you say “use”, do you mean use only publicly or use internally or use in any way?
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
I mean use it as an expense. So if your work as a political entity is being guided, it would be used for that.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If I understand correctly then, you're suggesting there may be a loophole such that a day or two before the writs drop you could do a poll, and even though it was done before the writ, it's as valuable a couple of days later as it would be if you'd done it during that writ early.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
That seems to make good sense.
Ms. Lawson, is there any reason why we wouldn't want to go down this road?
5:55 p.m.
Deputy Chief Electoral Officer, Regulatory Affairs, Elections Canada
I guess my only question would be that polls in preparation for either of those periods would become part of what would need to be reported. It's not entirely clear to me how we draw the line. That's just a remark.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
The concept I like. It looks like a bit of a loophole, especially for those who have more money than others. Do a nice, fresh poll the day before the writs drop and it's as valuable to you in your strategizing three or four days later as it would be if you did it the day of and used it for strategizing.
If I'm understanding correctly, this closes off a potential loophole vis-à-vis expenditures that we intend to capture during the writ period but because of the nature of the details, it would technically be outside.
If I'm understanding this right, Mr. Nater is suggesting that ought to be captured as part of an election expense since they would be using it as part of their intel in devising their strategies. It seems to me this makes good sense, that it is not partisan, and that it is a good closing of a loophole.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Using intel as part of your strategy, I presume, also counts for many previous elections. How far back does this cover?
Mr. Morin, how do you interpret this legally in preparation for either of those periods?
5:55 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
This is in fact the difficulty, and I think this explains why this period, during the pre-election period and entering the election period, was chosen. It's because surveys can be conducted at all times in between election periods and they are all potentially used for the preparation of the strategy towards the next election period.
The way Bill C-76 is drafted currently brought much certainty as to which election surveys would be counted or not.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
As this amendment reads, how far back would it capture?
5:55 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
It includes the day after the previous election period, potentially.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Anything that anybody spends preparing for the next election could theoretically be captured by this.
5:55 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Potentially.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
[Inaudible—Editor] is preparing for the next election. That's....
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
At the same time, all of our expenses are audited as well. There's going to be a difference between a public opinion poll authorized three days after the election versus one three days before. It falls to the auditor. As entities, we are all audited to determine and to ensure that we're properly reporting. I think the information that's garnered three days before a writ period or a pre-writ period.... It's logically going to follow that that's going to be used directly for those expenses.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
In the absence of those words, I could see David's point. You go all the way back to the beginning and I don't think anybody's suggesting that.
5:55 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
If I may add, however, this specific provision applies to surveys conducted by third parties. It doesn't apply to political parties. During the pre-election period, only the partisan advertising expenses are being monitored for political parties, and of course, during the election period it's all election expenses. The definition of election survey is not relevant for political parties in this context. By extending the period, it would also mean that we would try to regulate third parties outside of the election and the pre-election period. As you know, third parties are everybody else but candidates and political parties, so that would potentially have a high reach on organizations that are quite active on —
6 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Would Nanos' weekly tracking that they publish on an ongoing basis during the entire period fall into this?
6 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
I'm sorry, I cannot answer that specific question.
6 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I think that's the problem, that we can't answer these specific questions. It's troublesome for me.
Thank you.
6 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If I may speak, Chair, your point is well taken. I like the idea, but the devil is in the details and we don't even have the details. The devil's having a field day. I think it's best we not pass this.
