Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 21st, 2025

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

When Mr. Perrault said it was difficult to check, I presume he meant it was difficult to check from candidate to candidate, because right now the returning officer has an obligation under the law to check each signature. That's the statute as it exists now.

I don't know if the technology exists now, but the names are printed. It may be possible to photograph that and keep on doing it and get the computer to check them as they come in, because you have so many days left in the election to allow that to happen. If we are talking about a normal riding with seven to 10 candidates, in my mind it may become something that is possible. It would add responsibility to the returning officer, but we must also remember that the returning officer also has staff. I think it becomes something that can be envisaged, in my mind.

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

Just to follow up on that, an example was given to the committee by Ryan Davies from Northern Perspective. I don't know if you watched that testimony. They had photographic evidence that had been posted by members of the longest ballot committee on social media accounts of pages of signatures that did not have a candidate's name at the top of the sheets when the signatures were being collected. Northern Perspective said they submitted that to Elections Canada for review, and Elections Canada said they had no evidence that any claim or request for a review had been submitted.

I'm just curious to know the mechanism behind the scenes at Elections Canada about how a question mark around signatures would be investigated and could be either legitimized or not if there was a concern.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

The Chief Electoral Officer has the option of referring matters to the commissioner if he finds that something is amiss in the process, if it comes to the stage where remedial action cannot be undertaken to his or her satisfaction. This is how the accounts of members of Parliament, and of candidates, are reviewed by Elections Canada. Difficulties are reviewed and solved between the candidate and Elections Canada. Where they cannot be, they are referred to the commissioner. That's how the referral takes place.

When I was there, a couple of hundred references were made at every election because it could not be resolved.

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

Do you feel quite comfortable that if 100 unique signatures, as a provision, were put in place, Elections Canada would be able to thoroughly vet those 100 unique signatures and ensure that they are in fact unique from candidate to candidate?

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

One thing I will not do is speak for my second successor. I think it's something that definitely needs to be looked at in terms of the technology that exists, especially as you've said.

Another matter that might be possible, and I don't know if this one becomes more difficult, would be to expose online the signatures of the people who have agreed to substantiate a candidacy and let ordinary Canadians review that.

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

That's interesting.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

That may be more difficult, due to the fact that you're talking about 343 ridings, or whatever, and getting it posted from each returning officer to head office, but technology is evolving so fast.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you.

That was exactly five minutes. It's very rare that we accomplish that feat, apart from Madame Normandin, who is exceptional at it.

Ms. Kayabaga, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

We've just spent a bit of time on this topic, which is of great interest to the members who were affected by this publicity stunt, if I can call it that.

Mr. Blanchet, in June 2025, the National Assembly of Quebec passed Bill 98, which made a number of amendments to the Quebec Election Act. We've spent a lot of time here talking about disinformation and how to deal with that.

Do you think that bill will help counter disinformation? Do you have any other ideas about whose role it is to manage disinformation, especially when it's spread on social media platforms? We've talked a lot about those platforms. We have a number of ideas on how to review that. However, I want to know who you think should have that role, as the chief electoral officer of Quebec. Do you think Bill 98 will be able to counter disinformation?

[Jean-François Blanchet]

Thank you.

As I mentioned earlier, Bill 98 does contain clauses to try to counter disinformation. It's a start. We'll see what happens once the act is enforced.

You understand that this is just a start and that we'll have to establish proof. Unlike at the federal level, I have investigative power. There isn't a commissioner of elections in Quebec. I have the power to investigate and prosecute.

Still, you can understand that there won't be sanctions during the election period under any circumstances. If an investigation is conducted, proof beyond a reasonable doubt can't be established in 33 days. That means we'll impose penalties after the election, if necessary. It's a start, then.

People have to be able to verify whether information is true. It's also up to electoral organizations to publish our information online, so that people can access and consult it.

As an electoral organization, we certainly don't want to start passing judgment on disinformation between candidates. Doing so would mean to start playing politics, and we want to stay away from that.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I'd like some clarification on that. If the idea is to avoid the political games that can take place between candidates, who do you think is responsible for managing disinformation? We could even find ourselves in a situation with foreign interference, especially on social media.

Whose role do you think it is to manage that?

[Jean-François Blanchet]

You're asking me who owns the accurate and true information. Who has the real information?

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Can you give me some details on that?

[Jean-François Blanchet]

It belongs to the person who has that information.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I imagine that the bad actors who use these platforms aren't necessarily trying to inform the Canadian public. They want to control the information.

Who do you think should be responsible for ensuring that measures are taken to ensure that Canadians have access to good information?

I understand that you can't take action during the election, but we're not in an election period, and we can see that disinformation on the Internet is on the rise. It's getting worse.

If you find out whose responsibility it is, what kinds of suggestions can you make?

[Jean-François Blanchet]

I'm coming back to that. It's a shared responsibility.

Of course, as an electoral organization, we're the reference for everything that has to do with the electoral process. We promote our website to encourage people to visit it and check all the information it contains to see what's true about the electoral process.

That said, if a candidate experiences disinformation, it will be up to them to publicly set the record straight. No one other than the candidate has that information and can say whether that information is true. I can't be the judge and jury of what I hear. I'm not in a position to go and check whether it's true.

I think people need to consult serious media and a number of sources of information. It's up to each individual to make sure that the information they hear is real and true.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

What I'm going to do with the remaining three slots is just add an additional minute, so we'll go with three and a half minutes, six minutes and six minutes, and then end our meeting today.

Madame Normandin, you have three and a half minutes, please.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to go back to the hierarchy that was established earlier, whereby the voter comes first and then the candidate, and propose a subcategory of candidates.

We represent major parties, but in the recommendation we'll make on the best approach, shouldn't we also take into account independent candidates, who may have trouble getting their ballots filled out with unique signatures?

I'm also thinking of small political parties, which may have only one official agent for all ridings. It could even be the case for candidates from major parties who are labelled as paper candidates. They may have trouble collecting signatures because of their limited chances of success in certain ridings.

Should we aim for some balance for candidates whose profiles differ from those of the major parties, which have a more established following in the ridings? That would help diversify the political options available to voters.

[Jean-François Blanchet]

I'm going to turn the question back to you. Before the longest ballot committee phenomenon, were there any specifics for the various types of candidates? The answer is no. I believe that anyone who wanted to run for office was still able to do so.

Should there be specifics for various types of candidates based on their political party or the fact that they're independent candidates? My answer is no.

It's important to find measures that can solve the problem without hurting people who want to run for office.

Let's go back to the official agents. In Quebec, certain agents acting on behalf of a political party can handle all the ridings. The important thing is that there's only one candidate per riding.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

All of those numbers set out for candidates in the Elections Act always represent compromises. The goal is to try to uphold the Constitution. In Canada, the right to be a candidate is a constitutional right.

The courts have supported those numbers, so it's hard to say that changes have to be made. I don't think we need to reduce the number of signatories. If someone wants to be an independent candidate, they have to collect 100 or 50 signatures. That can be harder for them than for a candidate from an organized party, I agree. At least there's the opportunity to move forward with 100 signatures.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I'd like to go even further.

If the minimum were raised to 1,000 signatures, as was also suggested, would you see things the same way?

That's one of the recommendations that we'll have to assess.

[Jean-Pierre Kingsley]

I'd stick with 100 or 50 signatures. I think those are reasonable numbers.

[Jean-François Blanchet]

That would be excessive. A thousand signatures would be really hard to get.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.