Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 11th, 2020

[Aleksander Essex]

I never say something is secure until I have an opportunity to examine it. I don't really know what Parliament does, but my expectation is that as a Five Eyes member, we would have top world-class cybersecurity. I've spoken to the CSE before. They are very capable, but again, as a member of the public...you know.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you.

I want to ask about the other point you made, about the distinction between these two types of online voting. The federal government generally has the capacity to train MPs on the new procedures. It's clear that the federal government has a lot more capacity than maybe other levels of government.

Ms. Goodman, do you want to speak a little about why that's so important and why that's important for this distinction?

[Nicole Goodman]

Absolutely. I believe when we wrote the article, we were framing it in the context of perhaps web-based or application voting, where you would go on a website and click. Maybe the intent is signalled a little bit more easily there, but upon reflection, I do think that video voting would work better for Parliament, for the reasons outlined.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Good; I was going to ask you that. You mentioned four different types of electronic voting, but I noticed you focused on the video voting. You made a claim about email voting being the least secure, but you didn't cover web-based or application-based, and I wondered why you shied away from that.

You know, I think video voting, which we've had some conversation about, is probably the easiest to implement. As you said, it might most closely mirror how we vote in the chamber. At the same time, is there not an opportunity here to develop an application or have a web-based voting system like the one that the U.K. developed, which, as we've heard from those witnesses, was quite robust?

[Nicole Goodman]

That is an excellent, excellent question. Just really briefly, with respect to procedures, for any remote online voting system that Parliament were to adopt, we would require procedures.

With respect to the article, we were really talking about cognitive biases and ensuring that the proper procedures were in place so that MPs could check their vote and ensure that that was how they intended to vote. As you heard from Alex, even in the case of Sarnia, where there's video voting, there was a glitch that flipped the vote the other way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Dr. Goodman. That's all the time we have.

Next up is Madame Normandin.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I thank all the witnesses very much. Hearing from them has been especially useful and meaningful. I will try to ask a number of questions. The first is for Mr. Morden.

Mr. Morden, you said that Parliament was not optional and that we will end up with delays in terms of decision-making. I would like to hear your thoughts on the fact that Parliament is technically supposed to reopen on September 20.

How important is it to already have a voting system in place by September 20?

[Michael Morden]

I'd like to see a voting system in place even before then. I think there's a strong argument for a summer sitting.

I understand there are technical steps to be taken, but I've taken confidence from the comments of the Speaker and others. It seems as though the House administration has adapted very quickly. I would expect those actors to sound a strong note of caution if they didn't feel confident they could deliver remote divisions, because if it all went haywire, they'd be the ones blamed.

So I would like to see even faster progress than that. I think it's important that Parliament make up for lost time and start to move a broad agenda of parliamentary business forward in order to keep up with history, which is moving very quickly right now, and to resume the issues that were important.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

I have a question for you, Mr. Roberge. We have discussed various voting systems and the importance of a vote where the individual can be seen. However, recorded division can take a very long time, especially if a vote on a number of issues is required. Since a very short time is available for voting, as well, a problem may arise if a technical issue occurs when it's our turn to vote.

I would like to hear your thoughts on a possible electronic system that enables one to vote yes or no and includes a video recording where the person says they vote yes on one bill, but no on another. That information would be sent by email, and then validated. That would give us more time to vote and to validate the vote twice. Would that be a worthwhile option to analyze?

[Pierre Roberge]

Yes, Ms. Normandin, that sounds good to me. As I was saying in my opening remarks, redundancy is likely the most important aspect of vote reliability, as is the flexibility you have in voting.

What is more, I think you have applications that use authentication mechanisms. The House of Commons technical team is very competent, and I have faith in it. When given a problem to solve, it generally has the resources it needs to achieve good results.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

So it would be worthwhile to point out that we can set the parameters of that kind of a system instead of choosing a pre-established system.

[Pierre Roberge]

Yes. As Mr. Morden was saying, it is a matter of flexibility. We have to act quickly to remain efficient and hold parliamentary meetings. What is important is that nothing prevents us from making adjustments after the initial implementation.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

That's excellent.

My next question is probably intended more for professors Essex and Goodman, but I invite all the witnesses to use the opportunity and answer it.

If we implemented a remote voting system, would you recommend that even members present in the House use that system or for us to be able to vote in both ways at the same time? What would be ideal?

[Aleksander Essex]

Thank you. I'll try to tackle this question.

There is strength in simplicity, especially when we're talking about cybersecurity and technology.

One of the reasons Dr. Goodman and I have gravitated more towards video voting as an approach is that it does have a certain simplicity to it. It's a lot easier to match a person's face and a voice—deepfakes notwithstanding—whereas when you are voting through an app, what the system is recording is not that you voted, but rather that somebody with your credentials voted. This is exactly what we saw in the Ontario municipal election. People were receiving PINs for their children who were in university, spouses were voting on behalf of each other, and so forth.

Video voting does provide a nice way to see the authenticity of the person there, subject to a number of other questions involving some of the issues discussed, but whatever you gravitate towards, I would encourage you to look for an elegant and simple option.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I will clarify my question. If some members were using an electronic system to vote remotely while other members were present in the House, should everyone use that electronic system to vote or could we have a remote electronic vote at the same time as a physical vote in the House?

[Aleksander Essex]

If I could borrow a line from the chair, whom I have been watching during these committee proceedings, I suppose that would be for the members to decide for themselves.

I can tell you that in the Ontario municipal election we saw this sort of hybrid model in many Ontario cities. Some people would go to an in-person place to cast a paper ballot, some people would vote online and some people would vote via the telephone.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Dr. Essex.

Next is Ms. Blaney for six minutes, please.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Good morning, and thank you all so much for your testimony today.

The first question I have is about voting. First of all, just for the record, I agree that if we're going to do some sort of virtual voting, I would much rather see someone's face on the screen voting one way or another. I think it would allow us all to have that high level of accountability.

As a parliamentarian who is farther away from Ottawa, I also really respect the fact that being able to choose the health of yourself, your loved ones and your constituency is also a priority at this time. I agree that the hybrid model is a good step forward.

One of the challenges we've heard about, though, is how many decisions are actually made in the House through voice voting.

Maybe I can start with you, Ms. Goodman, if you have any information or thoughts on how to do a voice vote during this time.

[Nicole Goodman]

A voice vote? You mean online.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Yes, with the hybrid model.

[Nicole Goodman]

I have some hesitations about the hybrid model based on what I've seen. I think we want to be careful. I definitely see the value in it and I know that other jurisdictions around the world are adopting it. I'd like to watch how that plays out.

I think we have to be careful to make sure that we're not creating two tiers here, where some MPs have better access, for example, if it's not just a vote but also debate, including some in-person debate in the legislature and some debate online. We need to be sure we're not creating two tiers of classes here, but that all MPs have equal access to speak and to ensure representation.

With respect to the voice vote specifically, I think it depends on the nature of the vote, but as I understand it, when you call a vote, there would be the yeas and the nays.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Yes, and usually they're in the same room, so you can measure the loudness and that let's you know which way we're going.

[Nicole Goodman]

You could have a system where you could go through the yeas first, then the nays. Everyone who is voting yea would raise their hands and you would go through them and count them; and then you could have the nays and go through and count them. This is really where I think it speaks to the importance of also double-checking and having more than one actor verifying the vote.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

One of the other challenges, of course, is that as we're in this model we have different challenges facing all members given the realities of their lives. One of the things we've had several folks talk about is predictability, so that we know when we're voting.

Maybe I could start with Mr. Morden. Perhaps you could speak to the inclusiveness of having predictable times for voting.

[Michael Morden]

I think that's important. In fact, I think that's also a discussion for the in-person Parliament when it resumes. It's incumbent on government to adapt its approach to how it wants to manage parliamentary business in order not to exploit this adaptation to alter the power balance or to acquire greater control over parliamentary business.

I don't have a technical fix for that. It's something that deserves scrutiny and certainly something that should be provided to the limited extent we're able to, but I think it's an important caution and something that this committee could reasonably seek assurances from the government on.