Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 5th, 2024

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I would suggest that this needs further clarification or perhaps oversight. For political party representatives to be eligible to assist multiple people in a long-term care setting, frankly, I believe—and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I will keep to clause 2—that this could be prone to abuse where a representative is a scrutineer, a campaign volunteer, who could be going door to door and assisting electors in a way.

Are there any safeguards that you can provide, some assurances, or is that something perhaps we should be looking at to provide further oversight and clarification, or perhaps a reasonable guardrail to ensure that this is not abused?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Mr. Duncan, I'm going to interrupt briefly, because I see Mrs. Pereira has her hand up.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

That's okay, but she may want to speak to your question.

Mr. Knight, we're just going to pause and go to Mrs. Pereira, at which point, if you feel you have something to add, certainly the floor will be yours at that point.

Mrs. Pereira, go ahead.

[Rachel Pereira]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to add to Mr. Duncan's question that it is at the request of the elector, who does need to ask, typically their friend or relative, or, in this case, a long-term care health worker in the facility. There is that measure.

I do understand the point that Mr. Duncan is making, and it's a good one, but it is at the request of the elector, not just someone who can go in and offer to help electors.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Okay, I see the point and the clarification there, Mrs. Pereira. I appreciate that.

I don't want to split hairs, but I just want to get a clarification. If I'm going door to door in a long-term care setting or even in a community where there is an advance poll, either-or, the broader context or issue here is that I could say at the door of the resident, “I'll come down with you, and you just tell them that you've requested some help and I'm here to help you.” Would that not suffice as asking for help?

I'll use my name and I'll malign myself here, so I'm not maligning anybody else's intentions. The interaction that I would have is that I knock on the door, and say, “I can actually help you vote. When I bring you to the table, you just tell them that you need some help and that Mr. Duncan is going to help you.” Is that considered enough for requesting assistance?

[Rachel Pereira]

Typically, and my colleague may be able to confirm, the elector asks their immediate relative or their friend that they would like their help, because they are a trusted person. The elector is assured that that person is not going to share how they voted in the ballot box or influence them in any way. They do seek the person close to them to have that assistance at the ballot box. It is possible that someone goes and proactively asks, “Would you like my help?”, but the elector would likely have someone in mind close to them, like their personal support worker or a friend or relative to help them mark their ballot if needed.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I get more questions about this and more concern. I understand the intent and the well meaning, perhaps. I won't suggest in this section that's not something that's trying to get more people to cast a ballot. However, I also think this is opening the door significantly to abuse.

It may not be the intention, but that's what we have to do in the policy work that we do. We have to acknowledge this. I think a political party representative can say they're friends with everybody.

In my riding of Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, I'm very fortunate to know lots of people and be friends with lots of them. I was a mayor in a community before, so “everyone is my friend”—quote, unquote—during an election particularly when they're eager to go and cast a ballot. There is a relationship there.

I'll cede the floor here, but one thing I will say is perhaps to cap that as opposed to having an unlimited number. Right now there are specific restrictions, but even capping it to say “assisting up to five people”, or something like, does give some flexibility, but doesn't have somebody going and assisting 50 people. I'm very worried about the open-endedness of this, the connection that there are no restrictions on political candidates or political party representatives or scrutineers.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

We have a point of order from Ms. Barron.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Chair, I'm noticing that there's some repetition, and so I thought it might be a good opportunity for me to bring forward a unanimous consent motion.

Clearly, the Conservatives have very important questions that have nothing to do with stalling this bill. The Conservatives have brought up their concerns about the part of the bill that benefits MP pensions, which I've also brought forward—

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

No, you can't do a UC during—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Guys, I know.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

You're going to allow a UC during a point of order when they're not allowed,

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

I said, I know. Give me a moment to speak, please, Mr. Duncan.

Ms. Barron, the rules do not permit for a motion to be moved on a point of order, so, unfortunately, we can't entertain that at this point in time. If you had the floor, it would be different. I would be happy to add you to the speaking list, if you'd like me to.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Chair, I was merely trying to resolve an issue that they had and trying to get creative with it. Thank you for clarifying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

I understand. Thank you.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Certainly, I'll try to find other ways to bring forward getting the Conservatives to support removing the portion of the bill that takes out the pensions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Ms. Barron.

Mr. Duncan, the floor remains yours.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Thank you, and thanks to Ms. Barron for trying to bring forward her issue, which the NDP and Liberals certainly have. Nice try.

I'll just wrap up and ask for a comment about capping. Could it be a reasonable compromise to cap the number of individuals one elector could help to make sure that we don't have 40 or 50 people to do that?

[Trevor Knight]

From the perspective of Elections Canada, that's a policy choice that absolutely is within the scope of this committee's work. I don't think we would have a comment on that.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Would it be doable to permit this committee to consider that? Would it be permissible and manageable from an Elections Canada perspective? I'm not putting you formally on the spot, but are there any red flags that are raised from being able to enforce this or manage that?

[Trevor Knight]

I don't see any concerns with that.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mr. Duncan.

Mr. Calkins, the floor is yours.