Procedure and House Affairs committee  There may have been some instances of improper behaviour, something that happened at a poll, and that would be acted on immediately. The basic integrity of the Canadians working at the polls was never something in contention. I remember having some preoccupation with some returning officers when the old appointment process existed, but the Federal Accountability Act took care of that, and the Chief Electoral Officer vets them, checks them out beforehand in terms of integrity and political neutrality.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I was made aware of issues as they existed, and we took action as they came to the fore. One example is someone turning back somebody from voting because the person looked inebriated. Well, looking inebriated does not pre-empt your right to vote in this country. If you act in a way that is disruptive, that's another matter.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  In my initial remarks, I said I understood why this is being brought forward. There's a preoccupation with the Frank decision.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Well, the government wants to appeal. I've not yet seen the documents that sustain the appeal. It is being prepared by the government at this stage. The stay was not granted. The court said that this was too pressing a matter, the grounds that the government put forward were insufficient to grant that.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  What am I supposed to say? Is it, “the matter is before the courts”?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I wouldn't go that far. As a matter of fact, if one goes that far, then one has to go that far for all Canadians. Because you're the spouse of, does not mean, you know.... What I was trying to say is that the committee should be aware of this. It's going to create problems. I recognize the special place that the military occupies when it comes to voting.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Well, I can tell you that when you've been the Chief Electoral Officer, you're sympathetic with the existing Chief Electoral Officer, your successor. I agree; I have no reason to disagree with what he said on that front. If he's concerned, I think you should listen very carefully.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Obviously my concern is that the “fairness” that is being reintroduced is too stringent in terms of its requirements. What I proposed to you are ways of meeting those objectives but simplifying the process. So I agree, yes okay, let us require people to register every time, but why do they have to produce a piece of ID that no longer exists in their pockets?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  As a separate entity from the register, to satisfy the ministers....

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I don't think so. I didn't think so when I was running the system. I was asked whether we should provide the stamps for something to come back from India, Bangladesh, the United States, or wherever. I said that people should bear their costs for doing that.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  It could be something more than 30 days, and I did say the initiative of the Chief Electoral Officer could be invoked when it's a minority. You might say you can do it only once a year or something, but it's something where a judgment comes in. When you're the Chief Electoral Officer, and it's a minority government, you're reading the tea leaves like everybody else.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I can see the validity of that. I'm trying to propose a system that I think is workable. If you did that, then you would have to decide what the best date is to do that annually in light of the move dates of Canadians, because I think you should take that into account. Now, it may not be possible, and I don't think January 1 does it for me.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I think so.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes, and there is international experience. The minister was kind enough to highlight it. In Great Britain, I think it's 15 or 20 years. They go way beyond five years. I'm not saying to do that. I'm saying lift it entirely. Someone may have been outside the country.... I'm thinking of—and it's something this committee brought to my attention at one time—missionaries.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  That's when we gave that interpretation, which may have been stretching it a bit, but that's what the committee wanted at the time. It's that person that I have in mind. He or she may not be a missionary; he or she may just be an ordinary Canadian who still wants to vote after 25 years.