Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 17th, 2021

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I really don't want to belabour this point, but Mr. Turnbull is talking about the most extreme situations. In those cases where we're talking about the most extreme situations, the poll should be cancelled. That shouldn't happen.

We know that, on average, Elections Canada workers are a little older. If we're willing to put the DROs and the poll clerks into harm's way, into risk, that really calls into question where we're going altogether.

From the very fundamental standpoint of wanting an open and transparent electoral process, we need to be able to have scrutineers or candidates access polling locations to ensure that our electoral system continues to be the most accountable in the world and the gold standard that we've set for ourselves.

If we're saying that it's not safe to have scrutineers but at the same time the poll itself continues to operate in that fashion, it strikes me as slightly strange.

I'm going to leave it there, but I think this amendment makes it very clear that we feel there should be open, transparent, clear elections during which scrutineers have the opportunity to oversee the process.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to say, as well, that I do recognize that circumstances change. There may well be difficult circumstances that make it hard to administer a vote, but I don't think conceptually, in the context of free and fair democratic elections, you can separate witnesses' and the candidates' right to observe the voting process from the vote. Either you can have a vote, which includes the idea of participants being able to monitor the conduct of the vote, or you can't.

While we are discussing a bill that would give expanded powers to the CEO to be able to make decisions to adapt to the pandemic, the question for legislators is this: What will be the scope of those expanded powers? I think it's perfectly reasonable for us as a legislature to say that the CEO does have a broadened range of powers, including an existing power to cancel a vote altogether, but that an authority that he does not have is to separate out the idea of the vote as the idea of marking the ballot from the idea of a free and fair process where there's the ability for participants to observe the conduct of the election. Those things have to go together to have free and fair elections.

That's something that we recognize in other jurisdictions when we send observers for elections to see that the process is conducted properly. We don't want our CEO inadvertently—because I'm sure he wouldn't do it on purpose—creating a circumstance where those two things are separated out and then we have the ability of certain political actors to call into question the legitimacy of an outcome because they were denied a right to observe the process. That would be very damaging for democracy.

As I've been maintaining consistently throughout the process, our goal is not just to protect public health—it is very much that—but also, equally important, to protect democracy. The challenge, the reason this is hard, is that we have to do both.

Of course, the safest thing is to not have an election at all. If we really want to protect public health, we wouldn't have an election. The whole thing is that somebody may well call an election anyway, and then we have to figure out how to protect our democracy and our public health at the same time. If public health was really the priority, we wouldn't be talking about having an election until the pandemic is over. However, we're clearly talking about it, so let's make sure that the process continues to be fair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay, shall—

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Again, I don't want to belabour this, and I do understand and do, of course, value the importance of witnessing the vote. I just think that what we're talking about are the most extreme circumstances where, essentially, what you're proposing in terms of this amendment would be forcing scrutineers into a small room where their health may be at risk. I think that is contrary to the intentions of the bill, and that's the challenge that I have. We're forcing that decision-making so that it becomes a question of, really, the CEO not having the power to adapt in that regard.

If that puts people's health at risk, that's what I have a problem with. That's what I'm putting first and foremost, which I think our government has done all along the way: put the health and safety of Canadians first.

That's my issue with this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Shall CPC-3 carry? Would you like a recorded vote or have it carried on...?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I would like a recorded vote, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

We will have a recorded vote on CPC-3.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you.

We're moving on to CPC-4.

Go ahead, Mrs. Vecchio.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

This amendment would prohibit the Chief Electoral Officer from permitting telephone or Internet voting or ballot counting through his authority to adapt the act.

We have heard some of these things. We've heard from provincial governments. There was some testimony talking about this, but I truly just don't believe that we have all of the evidence that's necessary to support something like this. That is why we're putting this in. There's just not enough evidence for us to try to move in that direction, so we would like to put in that amendment.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

It's a safety net I guess. It wasn't ever said that this would be used, but it's to make sure. Is that what...?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Absolutely. It is a safety net. Looking at...I think maybe it was British Columbia. I think this is something they put in because of recognizing.... We recognize how large Canada is, so we need to have a much greater view of this and not just....

If we're going to do it, it would have to be piloted over a much longer period of time to make sure it's effective.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I have just small comment here.

In the CEO's testimony at this committee, he publicly committed that this power would not be used to add new phone-in or other technologies into the voting process as options. That commitment was made publicly, so I'm not sure why this amendment is necessary when we've already had that very clear, public commitment from the CEO.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

First of all, I'd like to say that New Democrats do think that the option of phone voting in particular should be explored in the future. We heard very clearly from the disability community that they believe this would help enfranchise members of the disability community.

We also recognize that we're apparently on a short timeline. This is about what we can do in the context of the pandemic. We've heard from the CEO that he doesn't think it's feasible to be able to implement these things on the timeline that I think everybody is working under, whether that's this summer or sometime later in the future. I know that the Prime Minister said we're not going to have an election this summer, but even if it's in the fall or the subsequent spring, that's a pretty tight timeline.

If it gives my Conservative colleagues and others some comfort to add this to the bill, I don't....

I think there is a little bit of a philosophical difference here with my Liberal colleague. I don't think there's anything wrong with the legislature being prescriptive. I don't think our job is to simply give the maximum power to an arm's length organization and then trust them to make good decisions. I think it is appropriate for us to clearly signal what we think is the direction we would like to see those authorities go in and to provide some more substantial direction. In fact, in some cases, they would also appreciate that. For example, the Chief Electoral Officer believes that it's in his purview to do many of the things that are in C-19 under his current powers of adaptation, but he said that he would feel more comfortable having clearer direction from the legislature. That's the enterprise we're engaged in right now.

If it gives some comfort to my colleagues to know that these things would not be implemented on a short timeline in a pandemic and have that in the legislation, I'm happy to support it for that reason, even though I think that in the longer term these are things worth exploring.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Mr. Blaikie. That was a fair comment.

Monsieur Therrien.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

In the Bloc Québécois, we consider that a change in the behaviour of voters in the exercise of their right to vote is quite important. We cannot conceive that in the short term, we could open the door in any way to an exercise of this kind.

That is why we consider that, even though the Chief Electoral Officer has said it—and he has said it, according to Mr. Turnbull— what is written remains, and that needs to be put in the bill. So we agree with that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Shall CPC-4 carry?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

We're moving on to Green Party-1. This is going to be a whole series of related amendments.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

She is not here to move this motion.

[The Clerk]

I'm sorry to interrupt, but since they are Green Party amendments, they are deemed moved, so nobody has to be in the room to move them.

This amendment is on the floor to be debated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Would anyone like to speak to this, or can we move to a vote?

We will have to make up for some lost time and speed through some of the ones that we can.

Yes, Mr. Blaikie, go ahead.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I just want to verify the government's intent to move their own amendment on this subject. Provided that is the intention and we'll be considering the government's drafted amendment on this issue, that will inform my vote, in that I would vote against this one if the government amendment is going to be moved. I would look for some direction on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

That makes sense, yes. NDP-5 is similar as well.

Go ahead, Mr. Turnbull.