Evidence of meeting #137 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 vote.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Chair, I know I ceded the floor, but I have one quick follow-up based on one of the responses. I was going to ask and and I didn't get to it.
I did ask a question about voter turnout being relatively the same as the general voter turnout.
Did anybody do an analysis on the 3.5% of the long-term care facilities that declined the opportunity? Was there voter turnout? Did anybody do an analysis of the voter turnout in those that declined compared to the ones that did accept the polling stations?
General Counsel and Senior Director, Legal Services, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Not that I know of.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to our witnesses who are getting lots of questions today. I appreciate their insights and clarifications on this.
I want to follow up on a couple of things from my previous round. The exchanges have been helpful and have generated a couple more questions or angles to get some details on.
I'll get to scrutineers in a subsequent question. The first part of that is to get some background information or clarification.
For section 124, clauses 21 to 23 talk about the notification. Again, the returning officer has an obligation—it's outlined in there—to provide notice and information to the candidates. They will say where voting will take place, on which days and where the mobile polls are for long-term care polling stations.
Does any part say what the minimum notice period is? Is it a day? Is it a couple of days? Is it the time whenever advance polls are set?
Is there something that's tied to it that lets us know what the minimum notice period is for those polling locations, starting on day 13 down to day zero?
Senior Policy Officer, Privy Council Office
I would direct your attention to the latter portion of proposed subsection 124(3), which refers to “in accordance with the instructions of the Chief Electoral Officer.”
The expectation would be that this level of specificity is provided by the Chief Electoral Officer to the returning officers.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I'll ask Elections Canada if there has been any idea on there of what that time frame is. I say this because it's new in the way that this is going as well. I'll get into scrutineers as well. Maybe the detail there hasn't been thought about yet. I'm flagging this.
Has Elections Canada, through the instruction of the Chief Electoral Officer, given any idea of what that minimum notification period to candidates would be for the dates, times and locations of polling stations in long-term care residences?
General Counsel, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
My understanding is that the instructions currently state that on the 24th day before the election, a list is provided. Subsequently, on every single day afterward, any updates are provided on a daily basis.
Obviously one of the most important provisions of the act is to allow the candidates to have as much notice as possible of where polling places are going to be. That's emphasized to the returning officers.
The only issue I would see with minimum times—and I'm not perfectly familiar with the instructions—is that there's always the possibility of a disaster of some sort or something where an immediate change has to happen. It would be more on an “as soon as possible” basis in those circumstances, obviously.
December 5th, 2024 / 12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Again, common sense would say, too, that day 24 would give 11 days' notice, in theory. Outbreaks happen, and they very often happen in long-term care. It is reasonable that four days out, if an outbreak is declared in Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry at Woodland Villa in Long Sault—I won't say Dundas Manor again—then yes, you might need to delay it later on or come up with subsequent matters. It's helpful to know that right now it's on day 24.
Another thing to flag is scrutineers. I will acknowledge that later clauses deal with assisting the elector. The reason I'm passionate in asking some questions or for clarification in making sure we dot the i’s and cross the t’s here has to do with later changes that are proposed, which we may be discussing with some debate when that time comes, on the assisting of electors. That is a major change to how individuals may vote, particularly those in long-term care. Scrutineers in that process will be important, I think, to the integrity of that change.
It was already confirmed that scrutineers have the same rules to participate and observe as they would at a regular polling station, but then the question that comes about is whether that is in long-term care or just in the vicinity of polling. Part of where I'm going with this is not wanting the ability to wrongfully or inappropriately influence an elector while assisting them. There is some capping here a little bit of a scrutineer's role, and yet in terms of the importance of a scrutineer here, if it's a staff member who's assisting multiple people, they may be going room to room. They may be bringing certain electors there who....
What's the oversight? Is there anything different for scrutineers that's been thought of in maintaining the integrity of that process to ensure that any elector, while they may receive assistance from...? One person may assist more than one person. That's the big change. Scrutineers have the right and the ability to oversee this in the unique setting of long-term care.
General Counsel, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
It's a very important question and a very important issue. It obviously doesn't apply only in long-term care homes. It can apply anywhere, but it's particularly acute there.
The role of the scrutineer is essentially the same. There were differences during the COVID election, but I don't think there are any particularly different rules for scrutineers. The rules on assistance in this bill—I know that's not the direct question—don't change too much from what is there now. There is a possibility to assist electors.
In terms of the role of scrutineers, it's something that I think people are aware of, but no particular instructions apply especially to long-term care homes.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
My comments on this are that it may be something for Elections Canada to consider in this new aspect of where one person can assist more than one elector and can help several. The reason I believe it's important in long-term care is that it's literally right in their home, right in a room in the home.
What are the interactions in terms of how a person is offered assistance and where? Is it where a staff member, a community member or a political party representative could go door to door in a seniors building or a long-term care setting and say they're going to help?
The reason it's a bit different to me is that if you were at, again, the Joel Steele Community Centre, a regular polling location, that could happen there, but generally an individual would make their way there. Frankly, in a long-term care setting, the population is a bit more vulnerable. It's easier in a good way, because they're in the elector's home in the building where they reside. They don't even need to leave the building, I'm going to assume, in 99% or more of cases.
It's just the extra provisions where we're getting into this. It's not just the assistance when they are crossed off the list, they sign their name and they go back to cast the ballot. It may be that in long-term care settings, where it's more unique, individuals are assisting multiple people. They engage with an elector and bring them down to cast the ballot and so forth. It's more than your average, regular polling location. This could be prone to abuse, frankly.
Director, Electoral and Senatorial Policy Unit, Privy Council Office
I'll turn it to my colleague, but I'll just add that the other element that's not changing if an elector requests assistance is the requirement that they make a solemn declaration that they will not influence that vote in any way or share that vote publicly. That is also an integrity measure that remains for any elector who requests that assistance from whomever they wish to have help them.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
My last part, if I could—just on scrutineers for now—is on the data collection of statistics: confirming a problem, debunking a myth, seeing a need for further clarification or looking into it. Is the keeping of statistics...? Now that this may be offered or is proposed, currently as is, when somebody signs and makes the attestation, the word you used there, to remain neutral and not influence the vote, are you keeping track or do you have the ability to keep track of not only how many were signed but also...?
For example, if I went into Dundas Manor or Woodland Villa and helped 45 people vote, are you keeping statistics in any way to see how well this was used or not used, to be able to say, “Wait a minute. We had one”? Is there any sort of data collection? I know you have to be very macro level, but I'm just wondering about statistics like, on average, x number of people signed or the average person in a long-term care facility helped 14 people, or two people, vote. Is there any way...or data collection that you're looking at keeping on this, confirming whether there's a problem, debunking a myth, or maybe seeing need for further change?
General Counsel and Senior Director, Legal Services, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Perhaps what I can say is that we have the documents in the sense that a solemn declaration is made and that the document comes back to Elections Canada. I'm afraid that we don't have statistics for you available, but we do, indeed, have the documents available.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Thank you.
My next couple of questions are regarding outbreaks.
I hope we don't have a pandemic-level election or a pandemic-level experience overall, no matter what, let alone around an election, but as I mentioned before, as did several others, outbreak is very common at long-term care facilities, particularly depending on the time of the year. It's a real and continuing concern and always will be. I think the pandemic taught us a lot of things from an elections perspective that could help ensure access to voting.
When we get back to a denial or a decline because a facility has an outbreak, are there any measures that Elections Canada is going to be taking to provide a reassurance to a long-term care administrator? I'll give you an example.
If a facility is in lockdown, you would not be having a voting station where you're going up...but one with plexiglass and things that were common during the pandemic. You would say, “We understand and are sorry to hear that you're in outbreak.” However, even now, newer buildings have certain sections, and they're isolated by section so that residents aren't crossing over. There's the taking of temperatures of employees going in, which was done before, masking, providing plexiglass and doing extra things to provide distance or separation between an electorate and a poll worker. As opposed to its being a hard no and saying, “There's an outbreak. We're four days out. I'm sorry, but we have to cancel the poll at this long-term care facility,” have you thought of being proactive and not only when they request it but if, all of a sudden, there's an outbreak? Have you thought of saying, “In the event that this happens, we believe that we have a protocol that could safely address this”, allowing those people to vote, working with the health and safety protocols but having some best practices at Elections Canada?
General Counsel, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
As you say, outbreaks obviously are part of what happens. In those circumstances, our returning officers are working with the administrators, and as my colleague said earlier, the administrator ultimately is the one who decides.
However, there are various activities we can take, including having the facility staff work as the election workers. We can also work with the facility to coordinate special ballot rules in many cases to help facilitate voting by mail, which can be done in a faster way than just voting by mail. We can obviously pick up the ballots. There are protocols that we can do.
We have a certain amount of PPE that we can work with the administrator.... As you say, there might be circumstances, such as the set-up, where we can work with the administrator to find a way that can deal with their concerns. If, ultimately, their concerns can't be solved, then that is their choice, and we work with them through helping with special ballots.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
The reason I say that it should be done proactively is that it's going to happen. With 5,000 locations, regardless of the time of the year, it's going to be a legitimate concern and an issue that happens.
The line I probably overused was how you get to yes in terms of making sure that more places—even though outbreak does happen, where the health and safety of the staff and residents is paramount, but so is having ease in the democratic process. Proactively have that policy in place to say, “Here are some protocols we are developing with extra measures such as procurement that the returning office may proactively have in the event of something happening.” Again, the plexiglass shields, masking and having that stuff available, particularly in long-term care settings, might be something that gets more people to say yes at the end of the day.
The last question that I have for now is on list revision.
Could you provide clarification on when an administrator may provide a list of residents currently residing at the polling site? Can you talk about how changes are made to the electors list of people being added and those being removed and what that process is?
General Counsel and Senior Director, Legal Services, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Are you asking about the list provided by the facility administrator to the returning officer?
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Yes, that's correct.
We have an electors list right now. We get one every few months from Elections Canada. During the writ period, my understanding is that the returning officer asks for an updated list. Obviously, it's easy to add to say all of a sudden, “I'm there in long-term care now, but I wasn't on the list to be added.” Are people removed from the list? For example, say there are 75 people residing there, and you put them on the voters list, but there are seven or eight names that are currently at that long-term care home that were not provided on this list. Are they removed or are they kept on there? Is clarification sought when these seven individuals are currently on the list, but they're not on your list? Are they deceased? Have they moved? Are they at a hospital? How does that work?
General Counsel and Senior Director, Legal Services, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
The short answer is they're removed.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Okay.
Those are my questions for now.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
