ISSN 0542-5492 Fourth Session - Thirty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba STANDING COMMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS 29 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Harry E. Graham Speaker FRIDAY, 25 JULY, 1980,8:00 p.m. Printed by The Office of The Queen's Printer, Province of Manitoba MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLV Thirty - First Legislature Members,Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name Constituency Party ADAM,A. R. (Pete) Ste. Rose NDP ANDERSON,Bob Springfield PC BANMAN,Hon. Robert (Bob) La Verendrye PC BARROW, Tom Flin Flon NDP BLAKE, David Minnedosa PC BOSTROM, Harvey Rupertsland NDP BOYCE,J. R. (Bud) Winnipeg Centre NDP BROWN, Arnold Rhineland PC CHERNIACK,Q.C., Saul St. Johns NDP CORRIN,Brian Wellington NDP COSENS,Hon. Keith A. Gimli PC COWAN,Jay Churchill NDP CRAIK,Hon. Donald W. Riel PC DESJARDINS, Laurent L. St. Boniface NDP DOERN, Russell Elmwood NDP DOMINO, Len St. Matthews PC DOWNEY, Hon. Jim Arthur PC DRIEDGER,Albert Emerson PC EINARSON, Henry J. Rock Lake PC ENNS,Hon. Harry J. Lakeside PC EVANS,Leonard S. Brandon East NDP FERGUSON,James R. Gladstone PC FILMON,Gary River Heights PC FOX, Peter Kildonan NDP GALBRAITH, Jim Dauphin PC GOURLAY,Hon. Doug Swan River PC GRAHAM,Hon. Harry E. Birtle-Russell PC GREEN,Q.C., Sidney lnkster lnd HANUSCHAK,Ben Burrows NDP HYDE,Lloyd G. Portage la Prairie PC JENKINS,William Logan NDP JOHNSTON, Hon. J. Frank Sturgeon Creek PC JORGENSON, Hon. Warner H. Morris PC KOVNATS,Abe Radisson PC LYON,Hon. Sterling R. Charleswood PC MacMASTER,Hon. Ken Thompson PC MALINOWSKI,Donald Point Douglas NDP McBRYDE,Ronald The Pas NDP McGILL,Hon. Edward Brandon West PC McGREGOR,Morris Virden PC McKENZIE,J. Wally Roblin PC MERCIER,Q.C., Hon. Gerald W. J. Osb orne PC MILLER, Saul A. Seven Oaks NDP MINAKER,Hon. George St. James PC ORCHARD, Hon. Donald Pembina PC PARASIUK,Wilson Transcona NDP PAWLEY, Q.C., Howard Selkirk NDP PRICE, Hon. Norma Assiniboia PC RANSOM, Hon. Brian Souris-Killarney PC SCHROEDER,Vie Rossmere NDP SHERMAN, Hon. L. R. (Bud) Fort Garry PC STEEN,Warren Crescentwood PC URUSKI, Billie St. George NDP USKIW, Samuel Lac du Bonnet NDP WALDING, D. James St. Vital NDP WESTBURY, June Fort Rouge Lib WILSON, Robert G. Wolseley PC LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLV OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS Friday, 25 July, 1980 Time - 8:00 p.m. which I am certain it is not, because I am certain none of the organized and recognized parties in Manitoba would condone it, but if it were being done CHAIRMAN - Mr. Arnold Brown (Rhineland). in that fashion, there is nothing that the Chief Electoral Officer or his staff could do to prevent that, whether it was with a voucher or without a voucher. MR. CHAIRMAN: I call the committee to order. We If people decided to play that way, you would only have a quorum. Mr. Anstett. Mr. Anstett, before you catch it after the fact. start, have you any idea how long you are going to So in this type of instance, enforcement is far be ? more important, in terms of ensuring that the Act is adhered to, than some arbitrary provisions that may MR. ANDRUE ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman, I realize we restrict the franchise. Nent for almost an hour and a half before the supper So I would recommend very strongly that a Jreak. I would think no more than another half-hour provision for a voter to add his own name on the list )n Bill 95, and probably a similar time on 96. Several by taking a declaration or oath of eligibility is nembers have prevailed on me to skip the more certainly adequate to the task of providing for nsignificant items. I do hope, when I do so though, openness on the list on polling day. :hat those of you who have been working on If you decide that you wish to keep vouching, I 1mendments will catch them in your clause-by-clause would suggest that the change that has been made :onsideration, because oftentimes, minor in Section 85(2) is undesirable. Section 85(2) had a 1mendments are just as important as important previous equivalent in the old Elections Act, which 1uestions of principle. provided that the voucher had to be from the same With respect to important questions of principle, electoral division. In rural areas, that is fine; in urban ust before we did break for supper, I was suggesting areas, that's fine. But the present Act requires that o you that there may be merit in considering the the voucher be from the same polling subdivision. In :omplete repeal of the vouching provisions in 85 and 'ubstituting therefor a provision that an eligible rural areas, that is probably not much of a problem, •lector can take a declaration, oath or affirmation, but in urban areas, where polling boundaries divide ,ttesting to his or her eligibility, and be added to the floors in large blocks and go down the middle of st on polling day. streets, you can no longer take Joe across the street That is done in some jurisdictions. Other to go vouch for you on polling day, when you realize Jrisdictions completely close the list and don't even you are not on the list, because that might be the llow vouching, so there is justification in terms of poll bound ary. You are first going to have to omparable legislation elsewhere to going either way. ascertain where the boundary goes and then whether lut in terms of the Attorney-General's voiced or not you can find a neighbour who is willing to go oncern about extending the franchise and extending to the poll with you to swear you in. pportunities for persons to be on the list, I think So, certainly, change that back to electoral 1at is probably the single most important proposal division, would be my recommendation, but resolve 1at I would suggest you consider tonight, that is, to the whole problem by taking out the requirement for uly provide a completely open list, with a check a voucher, and you will have gone a long way to (stem. making it a very open and progessive list. Now, obviously one of the objections to doing that, Once again, a policy question with regard to that anybody can get on the list. I don't believe Section 90(1): I would recommend to you gentlemen 1at that is true. However, with the tightening up of this evening, that you consider removing the right of 1e penalities and the enforcement sections in this candidates and scrutineers to have certificates to :atute, there i�, no question that you will have vote at another poll. Any time you allow the transfer ' Jportunities for prosecution. I can tell you, with of the right to vote, give someone a certificate that )me authority, that after the 1977 election, a entitles he or she to get a ballot somewhere else, Jmplete analysis was done of every single swear-in you are introducing opportunities for fiddling with the the province of Manitoba, and it was discovered system, to put it quite bluntly. I am not suggesting ere was one unqualified elector who was added to that this is done on a regular basis, but I am e list, one out of something in the neighbourhood suggesting that where you allow a transfer of a ' 8,000. That was at an advance poll in St. ballot, it is awkward enough to be doing it with the )niface. I won't identify the elector; I don't even returning officer's own staff, and the potential for member the name, so I can't. abuse is there, but when you are doing it with the So the incidence of abuse of this provision is very scrutineers of the candidates, the potential for abuse im. On the other hand, if you really view it, of that poll official's certificate is pretty wide open. •uching, the requirement for a voucher, as some So I would suggest that candidates or scrutineers rm of protection, then I think we are all being a bit don't really need the poll official's certificate to vote. 1ive, because certainly any person who fraudulently Most of them vote at advance polls now, and are shes to get his name on the list will have no directed to do so, because the last thing the parties Juble finding another party prepared to assist him. and the candidates want them to do is to be worried 1d if this is being done in an organized fashion, about voting on polling day. Every time there is a 219 Friday, 25 July, 1980 close election, you hear the stories of the scrutineer Mr. Chairman, I am skipping a few items, but ' who was so caught up in doing his or her job in the have some trouble skipping too many. poll, that they forgot to vote themselves, and of A quick point, Section 106 requires that spoilec course those stories come from all sides, and the ballots be endorsed as spoiled. In every jurisdictior closer it gets, the more of them there are. of which I am aware, it specifically provides that the So the parties generally ask their people to vote in spoiled ballot not be opened, because this is a vote1 advance, and with the expansion of the advance poll, who marked it incorrectly and wants a new one, bul either the way it is proposed in the bill or with the this provides that the DRO has to open it up anc introduction of the continuous advance, I don't see write "spoiled" across the front of it.