Thank you, Madam Chair.
This morning I have with me Anne Lawson, deputy chief electoral officer, regulatory affairs; Monsieur Michel Roussel, deputy chief electoral officer, electoral events and innovation; and Madame Karine Morin, who is my chief of staff and responsible for languages issues in the agency.
Let me start by saying that improving services in indigenous languages is, in my view, an important aspect of offering a more inclusive electoral process and reducing barriers for indigenous electors. More fundamentally, I believe that it is part of reconciliation. Although we currently offer information products in several indigenous languages, we are working to improve our processes and service offering. This includes the consideration of indigenous languages on the ballot and on a range of information products that can be made available at the polls.
Before considering changes to the federal ballot, it is important to understand the existing legal and operational ballot production regime. The design and content of the ballot is set out in some detail in the Elections Act, including a schedule that contains a visual image.
These requirements relate not only to language, such as the use of the Latin alphabet and the alphabetical ordering of candidate names, but also physical characteristics, such as a counterfoil and a stub, with lines of perforations separating them. These special characteristics mean that current ballots can be printed only by a relatively limited number of suppliers, and are printed and distributed within a very tight time frame.
While the name of the candidate may be in any language using a Latin alphabet, candidates must provide proof of identification when they are nominated, and this name is then used on the ballot.
For political parties, the party name appears on the ballot in the language the party chooses. There is no requirement for a party to have a bilingual name. Currently, there are three parties that have a name only in French, and one uses an English-only name. These names are not translated on the ballot.
Under the Act, the ballots must be printed in the very narrow window that exists between the close of candidate nominations, 21 days before polling day, and the very first day of advance polls, which is 10 days before election day. In large and remote ridings, getting the ballots printed and distributed across the riding in time for advance polls is already a significant challenge.
That said, we see four different options for the use of indigenous languages for federal ballots. Each option raises specific policy, operational and electoral integrity concerns that need to be considered by this committee. All but one of them require legislative changes. For ease of reference, I have supplied a placemat that reviews the four options and the main associated questions that they raise, mostly for Parliament.
One option would be to offer a multilingual ballot that includes one or more indigenous languages in designated constituencies. This first raises an important question about what threshold of an indigenous population in a constituency would be required before including an indigenous language and whether a cap on the number of languages on a ballot is necessary.
Some have suggested ballots should be made available to indigenous voters in their own language in constituencies where they represent 1% of the population. A bill to that effect was tabled. In practice, if measured by the mother tongue of indigenous Canadians, a 1% threshold would mean administering ballots in 17 indigenous languages in 27 constituencies, with up to five indigenous languages in some constituencies.
The use of printed ballots with more than two languages raises important questions regarding accessibility and design. Putting the names of parties and candidates in multiple languages on a ballot risks making a crowded, busy text that may be difficult for some voters to comprehend, especially voters with low literacy levels or an intellectual disability, as well as voters with a visual impairment. It would be critical to test the ballot design with user communities prior to the legislative enactment of this model.
Madam Chair, I've passed around a copy of a PDF document. This ballot was used in the constituency of Saint-Boniface—Saint-Vital in the last federal election.
Of course, this is an extreme example. Some ballots have only three candidates' names on them. That said, when we think about ballots, we must consider this type of complexity if we need to add languages.
A ballot in a language other than English and French requires the transliteration of candidate names and the translation of party names. Elections Canada isn't an expert on indigenous languages. We currently provide information products in 16 indigenous languages. We know that, for some of these languages, there are very few experts and that translation timelines are sometimes substantial. This significantly affects production timelines and the whole electoral calendar, which would need to be extended. Multilingual jurisdictions typically use other processes or solutions to provide ballots in the elector's preferred language. These processes include the use of electronic voting machines that allow electors to choose the language of their ballot. For example, this happens in the United States. Sometimes, logos or symbols can also be used instead of names to represent parties on ballots.
Another option would be to amend the act to allow for a separate indigenous language ballot. This option reduces ballot complexity for electors. However, it poses additional challenges with regard to production and distribution timelines. In addition, assuming that the two ballot options would be available throughout a given constituency, the secrecy of the vote could be compromised in places where members of one linguistic community are few in number. Having a distinct ballot used by only certain voters within a polling division could identify the voting choices of these voters. As a result, I don't recommend separate ballots.
A third option, which is a variation on the multilingual ballot, would be to pursue an approach similar to that used in territorial elections in Nunavut, where candidates who wish to do so can provide their names to appear on the ballot in the Inuit language. An amendment to the act could permit candidates to provide an indigenous language name for use on the ballot, alongside their name in English and French. Federal parties could also be entitled to provide indigenous versions of their names to be used on ballots in certain ridings if they wish. This would be consistent with the current approach, where parties can but are not required to have their names both in English and in French.
Although this option would remove the need for independent translation or transliteration of ballots, it raises other questions or considerations for Parliament. Candidates must currently provide documentary evidence of their name. Would this requirement be kept for indigenous names as well as for French and English names—two documents? If not—and I'm assuming not—would Elections Canada have to validate the transliteration? In addition, who would determine—the candidate or the party—which version of a party name is used in which riding? Finally, it is important to note that under this model indigenous electors would not necessarily be offered a ballot with all candidate and party names on the ballot.
The final option, which I recommend and which is used in some jurisdictions, does not require legislative change. Elections Canada would provide and can provide a facsimile of the ballot in an indigenous language for voters to use behind a voting screen. During the 2021 election, the last election, Elections Canada experimented for the first time with the use of a ballot facsimile, with the preparation of posters reproducing the ballot in Inuktitut displayed near the voting booth in all the polling stations in Nunavut. I've brought—and we've shared—copies of both the poster and the facsimile that was laid on the table for electors to see and to make the comparison. Despite some production challenges, we were able to produce the facsimile just in time for use at advance polls.
In consultation with indigenous communities, I would like to expand testing of this approach in other districts, using other languages, although I also plan to expand the deployment of information products in indigenous languages at the polls to reduce barriers and to ensure that the voting experience of indigenous Canadians is more reflective of their identity. This will allow us to become more familiar and agile at using indigenous languages in the voting process outside of Nunavut, which to date is the only Canadian jurisdiction with experience in this area. We will be able to work with candidates and parties to test facsimiles, including transliteration of candidate names and, where appropriate, translation of party names. We can also test out the timelines for the printing and production process.
In conclusion, Madam Chair, I understand the significance of this issue for indigenous Canadians and I am committed to increasing the use of indigenous languages in the electoral process, but I also urge this committee to consider carefully the complexities around the use of multilingual ballots. I do not recommend legislative changes at this stage, but to instead pursue and expand the use of facsimile ballots in other indigenous languages. This experience will help Elections Canada and this committee to take further and better-informed steps in this important area.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for inviting me. Of course, I'd welcome questions.