Video: There’s a battle brewing over changes the Harper government is making to the Elections Act and the man leading the charge is the head of Elections Canada. Marc Mayrand says the changes will disenfranchise thousands of voters and create an unfair system. Vassy Kapelos reports.
OTTAWA —The Conservatives’ proposed elections overhaul is riddled with problems that could disenfranchise some voters and discredit the system, Canada’s elections watchdog said Thursday.
In an opening statement to MPs lasting almost 20 minutes, Mayrand laid out in detail where his concerns lie with the Conservatives proposed election amendments, which are making their way through the Commons.
READ MORE: 5 things to know about Conservative election reforms as Mayrand takes the stand
First, he focused on the proposed changes to acceptable forms of identification at polling stations. Bill C-23, which the Conservatives titled the Fair Elections Act, proposes ending the current practices of vouching — wherein one person confirms another’s identity — and accepting voter information cards received in the mail as acceptable ID in conjunction with another form of ID.
“Election day should be a time, and it may be the only time, when all Canadians can claim to be perfectly equal in power and influence, regardless of their income, health or social circumstances,” Mayrand said. “This can only be so if voting procedures are designed to accommodate not only those of us with busy schedules, but also, and even more importantly, the more vulnerable and marginalized members of society.”
To that end, Mayrand said most electors do not have problems complying with identification requirements. But a few, including young voters, seniors and those on First Nations reserves, do when it comes to proving their current address.
“For many of those electors, vouching by another elector is the only option,” Mayrand said, adding the vouching process could be reduced and simplified, though certainly not eliminated. ““We could expect a significant proportion of them would not be able to vote under the rules proposed.”
WATCH: NDP uses Mayrand’s critique of Fair Elections Act to hammer Conservatives in House of Commons Thursday
Approximately 120,000 people out of an electorate of 24 million used the vouching system in 2011. More than 14,800,000 people voted in 2011.
In the House of Commons later Thursday, the NDP echoed some of Mayrand’s concerns, arguing the voter information card has a high accuracy rate and could be the most accurate and widely available government document.
Conservatives, however, argued some electors receive multiple cards under different names or with different addresses, making the system vulnerable to widespread fraud.
“If the NDP wants to take its message that people should be able to vote without any form of identification, that’s fine. We on this side of the House of Commons will protect the integrity of the system,” Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre said, ignoring the fact the voter information cards wouldn’t be accepted if not used in conjunction with another valid form of ID.
Mayrand dismissed the Conservative claim that 50,000 irregularities in the last election related to vouching could be linked to fraud. Rather, he said, those were mostly administrative and never linked to fraud.
Fundraising
Mayrand also highlighted concerns with changes proposed to the political financing framework that would, in essence, raise the limit on how much money parties can spend during election periods.
Under the new bill, fundraising costs would be exempt from campaign spending limits, so long as that fundraising is targeted toward people who have donated at least $20 to the party, one of its riding associations or a federal or leadership candidate within the past five years.
So, parties can call existing supporters without the cost of that call counting against the party’s expense limit.
Should the bill pass, it would also increase the existing election spending cap by five per cent for national and local campaigns.
“In Canada, electoral fairness has traditionally been understood to mean maintaining a level playing field among parties and candidates by the strict imposition of spending limits,” Mayrand told the committee. “By increasing those spending limits and, most significantly, creating an exemption for certain fundraising expenses, Bill C-23 may well compromise the level playing field.”
Reading from his notes, Mayrand said it could be very easy for a party to “dress up” party communications as fundraisers. this distinction would be near impossible for his office to enforce.
Poilievre has said the measure will be regulated through compliance audits of parties’ expenses and parties being obligated to keep copies of the lists of fundraising calls made and any scripts used.
“The chief electoral officer is wrong on this point, as well as on other points,” Poilievre told the Commons. “The bill that we’re bringing forward … will require that all mass calling scripts and all autodial scripts be kept for a year so they can be available for investigators to examine them.”
The elections watchdog finished his statement casting an anxious eye on the bill’s proposed changes to what he and his office would be allowed to communicate to Canadians.
Getting out the vote
In his role as chief administrator of federal elections and byelections, Mayrand’s office often conducts studies into voting patterns and has funded ad campaigns reminding Canadians of their democratic right to vote.
But as the bill is written, Mayrand’s role could become limited to letting the public know where, when and how to vote. Elections Canada could be stripped of the right to encourage the electorate to cast ballots and making relevant research available to the public could be banned.
“I am very preoccupied in this regard with the limitations Bill C-23 imposes on the ability of my office to consult Canadians and disseminate information on electoral democracy, as well as to publish research,” he said. “I am unaware of any democracy in which such limitations are imposed on the electoral agency and I strongly feel that an amendment in this regard is essential.”
When the NDP asked the government about that, Poilievre said this was yet another point on which Mayrand was wrong.
Testimony delayed
Before Thursday’s meeting got going, the NDP accused the Conservatives of deliberately disrupting Mayrand’s highly anticipated testimony on the government’s contentious election reforms.
Mayrand was scheduled to begin speaking for 90 minutes to a House of Commons committee Thursday morning, but last-minute votes curtailed that.
When the meeting finally began, almost 30 minutes late, Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski suggested extending the committee meeting in an effort to ensure his colleagues get their full 90 minutes with Mayrand.
The chief electoral officer told the committee he would be flexible today to allow for an extended committee meeting.
In the House of Commons Thursday morning, the Conservatives moved to limit debate on two government bills, requiring MPs to file into the chamber to cast a vote on the motion. The first vote took place just as Mayrand was set to begin testimony.
The meeting was again interrupted following Mayrand’s opening statements, for a second vote.
NDP MP David Christopherson spearheaded a lengthy filibuster on the Conservative elections bill in protest of the government’s hesitance to launch cross-country consultations on the proposed legislation.
Comments