Evidence of meeting #131 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Co-founder, Democracy Watch
That is the combination of the pre-election limit, which is now over $1 million, and the election spending limit, which is now over $600,000.
Co-founder, Democracy Watch
The pre-election limit, of course, only applies if an election is held on a fixed election date. Otherwise, it doesn't apply. That's the total amount that one voter can spend to influence an election. It's just ridiculous to allow that, especially when it's the same amount for a group that represents tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of voters. One voter only represents one voter. They shouldn't be allowed to spend more than a couple of hundred dollars.
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
You mentioned also—and it piqued my interest—the third party and the question of nominations in leadership races. There have been some stories going around about the influencing of leadership nominations. What are your recommendations in terms of that? I know that the Chief Electoral Officer has brought up the issue of nomination races. I'd like to get your opinion on those.
Co-founder, Democracy Watch
Again, everyone thinks Canada is ahead of the U.S., but political action committees in the U.S. have to disclose their donors when they're spending on primaries for a party leadership race, nomination races and the primaries that are held.
In Canada, third parties can spend, in secret, an unlimited amount of money. They're actually allowed to collude with a nomination contestant and collude in a slightly more restricted way with a party leadership contestant.
This has been highlighted, thankfully, during the Hogue inquiry. I'm very sure you're going to face a recommendation from Commissioner Hogue that third parties should be required to register and disclose—
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
I apologize. I'm going to just cut you off quickly because I just want to ask Professor Loewen the same question.
I don't know if I have enough time.
Professor Loewen, do you have any comments regarding nominations, leadership races and foreign influence on that?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Yes, the participation of non-Canadians or people under voting age in nominations or leadership races has, I think, been pretty clearly shown to be cancerous on our politics. You should try to regulate it out.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Thank you, Mrs. Romanado.
Welcome to the committee once again, Mrs. Gill.
You have the floor for six minutes.
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I want to thank the witnesses, who want to strengthen our democratic process, as we all do.
Mr. Loewen, I have a question for you regarding what you mentioned. The bill's objective is to increase voter turnout. However, you believe that, despite the goodwill and the numerous measures contained in the bill, any increase to the voter turnout will likely be marginal or, at the very least, insufficient compared to the objective.
Can you confirm that I understood correctly what you said earlier?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Thank you for the question.
My contention is that the increase in the ease of voting through mail voting, expanded days of voting and allowing people to vote anywhere in a constituency might lead to an increased voter turnout of two or three percentage points on average. It's certainly not a cure to the very comparatively low levels of voter turnout that we see in Canada.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
This means that we have sort of reached a ceiling—I am not sure if this is the right way to put it. Even with multiple new measures, voter turnout would only be increased by two or three percentage points. We would need to come at this from a different angle.
Is that correct?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Yes, I agree with you that we've effectively, I think, squeezed as much juice from the lemon as we can in terms of making voting easier for Canadians.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Right. We are talking about what can be done to increase voter turnout, but not about what should not be done.
I have a question about this. This specifically applies to us in Quebec, but it could obviously apply anywhere else. Next year, there will be municipal elections throughout Quebec roughly at the same time as the federal election. This worries us because we fear that it might lead to a lower voter turnout. Do you think that could be the case?
As I said, we talked about what needs to be done to increase voter turnout. At the same time, we should make sure that elections do not occur at the same time and compete with one another. Do you agree that this could have a negative impact on either one of these elections?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
It doesn't overly concern me. It's common that there's proximity between federal and other elections. We have a lot of democracy in Canada, so I don't share your concern about that.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
You do not share these concerns.
Do you not think that it could have a negative impact, for example, on electoral logistics, on candidates who might want to run in more than one election or on youth voting? Scientific literature shows that for young people, the first vote is important to form voting habits. Are we not running the risk of depriving them of an opportunity to vote or creating confusion between the two polls, as others have mentioned during this committee's last sitting?
Do you think this could negatively impact the overall voter turnout or the electoral process more generally?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I don't share that concern. I think young people can sort out the difference between voting for their mayor and city council and voting for members of Parliament.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I said that this concern was demonstrated in scientific literature, but I recognize that your opinion may differ and that you might not agree.
I have one last question.
You said that people have several opportunities to vote. The bill would delay the next election by one week. Do you think this would have a significant impact on voter turnout?
I believe it was mentioned that this measure was mostly for religious purposes, but I still think that voters have plenty of opportunities to vote.
Do you agree that this proposal in the bill would have a negligible impact on voter turnout?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
To be very candid with you, I think the explanation appears cynical, and I don't think that there's any concern about holding an election during the period of Diwali, given the number of other opportunities people have to vote and the fact that many people who are observant of Diwali—Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists alike—would still be happy to vote on the day of the election. I'm not persuaded by the argument that the day of the election needs to be moved, to be very candid with you.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Wait, are you saying that I still have some time left?
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Is that so? I usually talk too much and run out of time, so that is extremely surprising.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
No, I will ask more questions right now. I am just surprised.
I want to ask Mr. Conacher the same questions. As the co-founder of Democracy Watch, I am sure that the things I mentioned are of interest to him. One minute is not enough time for him to answer all my questions, but I would like him to share his thoughts on voter turnout and Diwali.
Co-founder, Democracy Watch
The actual date of the election, whether it's extended or left as it was fixed, is not Democracy Watch's greatest concern. We're much more concerned that the overall election system is unfair: It favours wealthy candidates and donors, Canada's big banks and the big parties, and essentially amounts to a system of legalized bribery—in terms of the donations and loans limits—and secret, unethical and undemocratic influence by third parties, especially during nomination races and party leadership contests.