Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Jean-Pierre Kingsley, former chief electoral officer, appears at Commons house affairs committee on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, November 29, 2012.

Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

The government's proposed Fair Elections Act includes some worthwhile changes, but also others that would disenfranchise some voters, weaken the public trust in Elections Canada and hinder robocall investigations, Canada's former chief electoral officer says.

Jean-Pierre Kingsley testified Tuesday in front of a committee considering Bill C-23, the government's Elections Act overhaul that has been under fire from many researchers and critics.

(What is the Fair Elections Act? Read The Globe and Mail's easy explanation)

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Kingsley had previously given the bill a grade of A-, an assessment cited frequently by the government; on Tuesday, he backed away from that and refused to assign it a grade, saying only he is hoping for changes that would make it an A+.

While saying parts of the bill are positive or neutral, "several changes are essential," Mr. Kingsley told the committee.

Those include abandoning a push to eliminate vouching, which allows someone to cast a ballot if another elector swears to the voter's identity. ‎"Please, please don't get rid of it," Mr. Kingsley said, adding the changes will "directly affect the constitutional right to vote of a significant number of Canadians, without justification."

Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre has said vouching is too vulnerable to abuse and fraud. Mr. Kingsley said vouching irregularities are mostly "administrative in nature... rather than being indicative of fraudulent voting."

He also pushed back against the bill's proposed limits on what the Chief Electoral Officer, currently Marc Mayrand, can say publicly. It would mean Elections Canada could no longer run campaigns aimed at boosting voter turnout.

"The Chief Electoral Officer must retain the authority to reach out to all Canadians‎," Mr. Kingsley said Tuesday. If the changes are not abandoned, "Canadians will lose their trust and their confidence in our elections. That's not acceptable."

Mr. Kingsley also opposed the government's proposal to exempt certain fundraising calls – those to people who've donated $20 or more to a party within five years – from election spending limits. Such a change "is not justified," Mr. Kingsley said, and would open the door to calls that ultimately urge people to back a candidate.

Story continues below advertisement

"It is simply not possible to seek funds without including reasons for giving, and this can only constitute advertising for or against a party or a candidate. Moreover, it favours richer and established parties to the detriment of small and especially newer ones," he said.

Mr. Kingsley said other campaign finance changes – small hikes to donation limits and larger ones to donations a person can make to their own campaign – will be positive changes "without seriously impacting the overall role of money in the process." ‎In particular, the bill includes "very reasonable" changes to clear up rules around loans to political campaigns, particularly unpaid party leadership loans, he said.

He welcomed some changes to boost penalties for erroneous robocalls but said the bill doesn't go far enough – it only calls for recordings of calls to be kept for a year, and doesn't require records to be kept of what phone numbers were contacted. Mr. Kingsley recommended keeping 10 years worth of records and also including the numbers called.‎ "There's not much point in keeping it for one year" because investigations take longer than that, he said.

The chief electoral officers of British Columbia and the Northwest Territories spoke to the committee Tuesday after Mr. Kingsley. B.C.'s Keith Archer said the elimination of vouching could disenfranchise voters, saying 14,000 people vouched provincially in an election last year. "I expect many of them would be disenfranchised" without vouching, he said.

NWT Chief Electoral Officer David Brock said ‎removing of vouching would harm those who don't have, and can't easily access, government ID, including many in the North and First Nations voters. He also pushed back against proposed changes that would infringe on the neutrality of elections officials – those include a proposed change to allow candidates, or their representatives, to examine people's ID, and allowing parties to recommend the appointment of certain poll officials. Mr. Brock said neither change should go through. He also echoed Mr. Kingsley in saying the bill shouldn't restrict what the federal Chief Electoral Officer can say, nor should it require Treasury Board approval for Elections Canada to hire outside experts to help with investigations, he said.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies