Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 4th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 17 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3), the committee is meeting for its study of the Leaders' Debates Commission mandate and its experience during the 2025 federal election.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person and theoretically on Zoom.

Before we continue, I would ask all in-person participants to consult the written cards on the table. There is a short video. Please keep in mind the health and safety of everyone in the room, especially our interpreters.

I'd like to make a few comments for members. I'll remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair. For members in the room, as you know, raise your hand if you'd like to speak. If you're on Zoom or find your way onto Zoom, use the “raise hand” feature and we will do our best.

Before we hear from our witness today—Michel Cormier from the Leaders' Debates Commission—we have a quick consent motion.

Three budgets on studies were presented to the committee. Is it the consent of the committee to adopt those budgets?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

I will now turn to Monsieur Cormier, who's the executive director and acting commissioner of the Leaders' Debates Commission.

You have five minutes, please, for your opening statement.

[Michel Cormier, Executive Director and Acting Commissioner, Leaders' Debates Commission]

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

I wish to thank you for the opportunity to report on the commission's mandate and the 2025 federal leaders' debate.

In many parts of the world, democracy is under increasing pressure, undermined by disinformation and polarization. In such an environment, political debates represent a rare opportunity for voters to hear from party leaders in a live, unfiltered fashion. In Canada, as elsewhere, debates have become crucial points of elections campaigns.

Polling done for the commission on the 2025 federal election shows that Canadians believe debates matter. Close to 90% say debates are important for democracy. The same number want debates in federal elections and expect invited party leaders to participate in them.

The Leaders' Debates Commission has been responsible for organizing leaders’ debates in the last three federal elections. As it does in every election cycle, the commission sought to improve the 2025 debates. Following consultations with producers, moderators and participants from here and elsewhere, we made key changes to the format, moderation and production of the debates in 2025.

For the 2025 debates, there was a single moderator, an experienced journalist on the set, rather than the traditional panel of journalists we have been used to seeing in federal election debates. The format was also simplified to encourage leader-to-leader exchanges and to prevent the leaders from constantly being interrupted by the timer. The set design was also simplified to so that the focus would be on the discussion itself.

I would like to take a moment to recognize the contribution that the debates producers, CBC/Radio-Canada, made to these changes.

The results confirm that this was the right approach. Over 62% of viewers said the debates exposed them to new ideas. The more flexible format placed a spotlight on the leaders and the issues of the campaign, and allowed the leaders more time to express their views. There was also less crosstalk.

More than 80% of people surveyed said that having a single moderator for each debate was effective. Canadians also felt that both moderators were neutral. The commission's post-debate consultations with political parties, experts and other stakeholders also revealed widespread satisfaction with the debate format and moderation. The commission believes that this simple and flexible format has proven its worth and should continue to be used in further debates.

The viewership was the highest on record. More than 19.4 million people tuned into the debates this year. Not only did Canadians watch for longer, but more of them also watched the entire two-hour debate than in 2021.

There was also greater reach and accessibility. The debates were available live on many television outlets, on radio networks and on 60 digital streams in Canada. They were also carried internationally and offered in 13 other languages, including five indigenous languages, American Sign Language,

Quebec sign language,

and in closed captioning and described video.

Notably, a broad coalition of news organizations broadcast the debates without the umbrella of a formal media consortium. This marked a turning point, widening the number of organizations that distributed the free signal of the debates. We plan to build on this wide distribution for the next debates.

The cost of the debates was also lower than it was in 2019 and 2021, mainly because they were held at a Radio-Canada television studio in Montreal rather than at the Museum of History in Gatineau, which reduced production costs. We also reduced interpretation costs.

As with previous debates, the Leaders' Debates Commission believes that there is room for improvement next time. New challenges arose in 2025, particularly with regard to participation criteria and media accreditation. The commission has made practical recommendations for the next commissioner on how to improve in these two areas. With regard to participation criteria, the recommendation is to use Elections Canada’s final list of confirmed candidates rather than the lists the political parties submit to the commission ahead of time. The commission will continue to handle media accreditation, but it recommends that it no longer be responsible for organizing the leaders’ press conferences that traditionally take place following the debates.

After three election cycles, we believe that the Leaders' Debates Commission has succeeded in stabilizing the debate environment. There is no longer any uncertainty about whether the debates will take place. They have been held in every election since the commission was created. All invited party leaders have participated and the debates attract record audiences. In our view, the fact that 90% of voters think these debates are important indicates that they are necessary and must continue to be held.

Thank you for your attention. I will now gladly take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you so much.

We will now turn to questions. We'll go to the Conservatives first, with Mr. Jackson for six minutes, please.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Cormier, for being here. It's a pleasure to meet you.

My first question has to do with your title as the interim leader. I think you just said you've made recommendations for the next commissioner.

I'm curious. Why are you still interim? Is there some delay, or are you passing on the torch, so to speak? If you can, give us some clarity on the process for the appointment of a permanent commissioner.

[Michel Cormier]

I'm acting commissioner until there's a new commissioner. That is the purview of the minister of democratic institutions. I guess the question should be for him.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

That's fair enough.

Have there been any consultations between your office and the department about a permanent appointment coming?

[Michel Cormier]

We submitted our final report on the debates in September with the recommendations. Now we're waiting to see what consequences we'll have from that report.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

In terms of the costs, in our briefing note that was ably prepared by our analysts, you noted that you had a surplus for this cycle. How well does that leave you financially if there is a sudden election call given the minority Parliament status?

[Michel Cormier]

If there is an election call, we will get another installment of money to pay for the debates. There is no lack of money. We had a surplus in every cycle—2019, 2021 and 2025—and that money went back to the Treasury Board.

We start over as soon as an election is called.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

That's fair enough.

Since the last election ended and given the unstable nature of this Parliament, what organizational planning efforts have been undertaken by your office in the event that a sudden election is called?

[Michel Cormier]

To start, we had to prepare a final report for September. We have five months after the election to submit a report to the minister. We spent the summer doing wide consultations to improve the report and have solutions to the problems that I underlined. We delivered that report on time.

Now we have to be election-ready in case there's an election. That means making sure the contracting for the producers is in line, and that's been taken care of.

As I said, if and when there's a new commissioner, he or she will act on the recommendations we made in this report.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

In terms of selecting the location in such a sudden situation, will you revert to using the same location as in the past, or are other locations on the table?

[Michel Cormier]

We always look at different locations. Given that we're in a minority government situation, it's hard to prepare or plan for a fixed-date election. The easiest solution is to do the debates in the producers' studios—Radio-Canada or CBC—because those are available.

If we wanted to do the debates at other venues—let's say where we did them before, at the Canadian Museum of History in Gatineau—we'd have to deal with events that are already planned, so that's more complicated.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I have a couple of more questions, particularly to do with your recommendations on the criteria for participation. I certainly agree with your recommendation in the report on the participation criteria. I'm just wondering whether you could walk us through a bit further how you came to that decision.

[Michel Cormier]

The decision to....

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I mean the recommendation to tweak the criteria to ensure that the early invitation situation that occurred is corrected.

[Michel Cormier]

When we looked at this criteria, we considered using the Elections Canada list, because it's the official list of the election, but after consulting producers and other people, it was deemed that it was too close to the debates themselves. The elections list comes out only a week before the debates, and traditionally, we've always wanted about two weeks to prepare so the parties can rehearse, knowing who they are up against, which is legitimate, and so the producers can prepare the set, the format and the questions. However, after consultations and after the debates, we came to the conclusion that one week was actually enough, even if it made it a bit tighter.

We think the cleanest and easiest solution is to use the Elections Canada list, which is the list of candidates who are on the ballot.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I appreciate that very much. Thank you.

With the 20 seconds remaining, I just want to say, particularly on the recommendation regarding the press scrum following the debate, that we certainly believe you made the right decision in the recommendation there as well. I appreciate your work on that very much. I don't know whether you have any brief comments on that, but I just wanted to make sure to put that on the record for you today.

[Michel Cormier]

Thank you for your support.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you so much.

Mr. Wilkinson, go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver—Capilano, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you for joining us today.

Let me start with just a very general question, some of which you touched on in your opening statement. With respect to the overall experience in the 2025 election, what would you say went very well, and what would you say perhaps didn't go quite so well?

[Michel Cormier]

What went well is that we managed, with the collaboration of the producer CBC/Radio-Canada and other stakeholders, to develop a format that works best for Canadians.

You may remember that in 2021, there was controversy around questions from a moderator—whether they were objective enough or not. We also had surveys showing that Canadians said they hadn't learned that much new information, politically, from the debates. Of course, at the time, we were still in the tradition of having a panel of journalists, so there were journalists coming on stage to ask questions. That changed the dynamic. Also, the time to answer the questions was not as.... Even some leaders told us that they felt they needed more time to talk.

We took all that in and worked with the producers to develop a format that has one moderator, an experienced television journalist who's used to hosting panels and political discussions and who's very familiar with the subject matter. We went with that, and that worked very well.

In the surveys we did after the debates, 63% of people told us they had learned more about the political positions of the parties than they had before the debate. For us, this was tangible information and data that proved we were on the right track. I think that was the highlight of what went well with the debates. Of course, there was the viewership, which was tremendous—19.4 million. That's a lot.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver—Capilano, BC]

You touched on soliciting feedback. Could you just describe for me how you did that? You mentioned in your opening statement that you did it with some of the stakeholders. You mentioned some opinion polling you did with the public. What was the breadth of the feedback you went out to seek? Were there some general themes that came back, and were there any surprises?