Procedure and House Affairs committee  Let me understand the question. A complaint is made, and the letter in reply says.... It must set out the reasons why it's being rejected. Our policy requires that the reasons be set out in the letter. Now, if one of the reasons is that we don't have enough evidentiary foundatio

Procedure and House Affairs committee  You can take it up the ladder, but I'd like more information when it comes up, please.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'll read from the Edmonton Centre press release: “Based on the results of this investigation, the Commissioner considers the reported public concern—that large numbers of electors voted in the wrong electoral district (Edmonton Centre) with the intention of affecting the result

Procedure and House Affairs committee  That press release states: “Based on the results of the investigation, the Commissioner has concluded that there was no evidence of wrongdoing that affected the outcome of the vote...”.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I have identified the changes I've made already. I hope they add to the ability to obtain compliance and enforcement with the act.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If the complaint comes from a candidate or person involved in the election, then that's a hearsay statement. We need to go back to the person who was actually influenced and get the firsthand evidence, if you will. If the individual himself or herself was influenced or pressured,

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. With regard to your first matter, I think the CEO looks after the recommendations from various entities for changes to the legislation. That's not my responsibility. Have I made recommendations to him? We've discussed a few, but I haven't firmly done so. As to time

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm not saying I'm investigating it, but the CEO's inquiry is still ongoing. I don't want to talk about investigations anyway, but I talked about the two cases I did because they are done. Is there voter fraud? Yes, there is. It's individual, though. It's people who are not quali

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If the question is what is evidence, the evidence is documents and witnesses who are prepared to give first-hand accounts of illegal conduct. That's the evidence. If the evidence was not found, I presume the investigation couldn't support the complaint with admissible evidence in

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm sorry, I don't know the case you're referring to. I presume it was before I took office, but if I did know, and if you wrote me a letter, I'd fish it out and have a look. That's all I can undertake to do.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. Yes, deterrence is an aspect of the public interest, both specific deterrence of the individual and general deterrence of others who might be so inclined to do the same thing. These are matters to be considered as well. I have to point out, however, that there is a

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If you're talking about what information we give out regarding complaints, yes, there is a document. I have a document here, which I can provide in English and French, and it's available: here's how we communicate; here's how we don't communicate. If you wish, I can provide that

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  The investigation role remains the same. I'm sorry, I got “investigations”, perhaps you meant prosecutions. The prosecution role is now the DPP's function.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  As I mentioned, we're updating our investigator's manual, and I will put a chapter in the manual on caution letters, and a generic draft of one so that people can see what they are. Most of the caution letters deal with referrals from Elections Canada, and they don't require a l