Madam Speaker, I rise in support of my colleague's bill. I understand the constraints and arguments put forward by members of the various opposition parties, and even by members of our party, to the effect that the photographs of all candidates should appear on the ballots, and I agree that this is a very good point.
However, when it comes to the overall issue, we must first think about people in our society who are at a disadvantage for one reason or another. It is nice to say “We all support access”. But when we then go on to say “There are many constraints”. I realize this is not an easy thing to put in place. But at the same time, this is precisely why we have House committees. If, as it is my hope, this bill makes it through second reading, it will be referred to a committee, and that committee may want to send for Elections Canada officials to discuss the details.
For example, I see no reason why the official photographs appearing on the posters of candidates could not be used on the ballots. It would only make sense.
At present, Elections Canada spends $8.6 million on pamphlets distributed to organizations for illiterate people. We do not know whether all illiterate people are reached through these organizations. I met some of them myself, and there is often an issue of individual pride involved.
The pride of the person. How many people want to belong to these organizations in the first place? And when they do, how do the organizations reach them when they themselves, these people, cannot read?
Even if pamphlets are sent to these organizations by Elections Canada, even if there are all kinds of systems used by Elections Canada to try to reach illiterate people, certainly a number of people are not reached. Witnesses have come to me personally at meetings.
At one meeting attended by my colleague from Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine and myself, one lady told us how she was afraid of taking the bus. She had avoided every public place until she was 35 or 40 years of age. Her pride prevented her from doing normal day to day routine things that we take for granted. One day something clicked in her mind and she sought an association. She went to school at a very late age. She even tried to hide from her own children that she was illiterate.
People like that do not venture forward. If we can help them in any way at all, if we can put that $8.6 million toward photographs on the ballots, then surely it will be simple to decide whether it should be a black and white or colour photo. We have decided this for driver's licences. In Quebec we have decided this for medicare cards.
I do not see anything wrong with deciding whether it should be a colour or black and white photo, how much it would cost, what the criteria for the use of photographs should be, whether it should be a photograph that is one year old or more recent. We do it for our passports. We do not use just any picture for our passports. It has to be stamped and certified.
I do not think the cost would be outrageous. I do not think the cost would be more than the nearly $9 million Elections Canada spends today to advise people who are illiterate.
The bill my colleague has put forward is well worth sending to committee. That is what he is asking. He is not saying that it is a perfect bill or that there are not unanswered questions. Of course there are as with all changes and unanswered questions, but not unanswered questions that defy solutions. Of course they do not defy solutions.
The member is asking for a majority vote in this House on the motion for second reading so we can send the bill to a committee. The committee can have hearings. The committee can hear from Elections Canada and the organizations representing illiterate and handicapped people.
It is well worth our support. I strongly support the bill my colleague has brought forward. He can make amendments in committee. He can propose amendments to the bill which is what he intends to do.
I have discussed with my colleague what he would like to do. He does not want to just accept piecemeal amendments at this stage. He wants to listen to what the witnesses have to say during the hearings. There may be one, two, three or four amendments to bring forward which he would be prepared to consider because he is completely open minded. He wants to safeguard the principle.
With that in mind, I would like to express my strong support for the bill proposed by my colleague from Verdun—Saint-Henri.