HANSARD
NOVA SCOTIA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PARTICIPATION IN THE
DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
SELECT COMMITTEE ON PARTICIPATION
IN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
Committee Membership
Mr. Michel Samson (Chairman)
Hon. Mark Parent (Vice-Chairman)
Mr. Patrick Dunn
Mr. Keith Bain
Ms. Maureen MacDonald (Vice-Chairman)
Mr. Graham Steele
Mr. Charles Parker
Mr. David Wilson (Glace Bay)
Mr. Harold Theriault
[ Hon. Mark Parent was replaced by Hon. Barry Barnet.]
Staff Attendance
Ms. Margaret Murphy - Legislative Librarian
Mr. Robert Kinsman - Hansard Reporting Services
Mr. James MacInnes - Legislative Television and Recording Services
Mr. David Whynacht - Communications Nova Scotia
Ms. Christine McCulloch - Nova Scotia Chief Electoral Officer
Mrs. Darlene Henry - Legislative Committee Clerk
Ms. Charlene Rice - Legislative Committee Clerk
Ms. Kim Leadley - Select Committee Clerk
Mrs. Sherri Mitchell, Select Committee Clerk
[Page 1]
HALIFAX, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2007
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
PARTICIPATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
1:00 P.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. Michel Samson
MR. CHAIRMAN: If I could call the meeting to order, I certainly want to welcome everyone here for our second organizational meeting on the Select Committee on Participation in the Democratic Process. I do note that my colleague, Dave Wilson, is not able to be here with us today, but I do note that Minister Barry Barnet is replacing Mr. Parent. Mr. Minister, is this just for today or is there a more permanent replacement?
HON. BARRY BARNET: This is just for today.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Just for today, thank you.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, if I could - Charlie Parker has sent his regrets. He has another engagement that he couldn't put aside.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. MacDonald.
As part of our discussion last week, some information has been forwarded to you, as committee members, that has been put together for the purposes of assisting us in our discussion. I met earlier this week with the representatives here at the Committees Office to try to get a better idea of the other provinces which have undertaken similar undertakings as this, what their total budgets were.
1
[Page 2]
Having quickly gone through the information, what I'm hoping is that we're going to be able to give you a one-pager on this, because right now the documents I have are all of these documents, and I don't think we need any more paperwork going out than necessary. It varies quite a bit, from very high cost to relatively low cost. Ontario's experience was $6 million, which is quite a significant cost. British Columbia, from what I can see here, appears to have been in the range of $3.2 million. (Interruption) I'm being corrected, $5 million.
If I go over to P.E.I., which undertook a similar undertaking in 2004, they seem to have come in - from what I can see, it seems to be a cost of about $18,000? (Interruption) Oh, $44,000, okay, so my figures here are wrong. Maybe I should just wait and get the real figures. But needless to say - do you have the figures for New Brunswick, Margaret?
MS. MARGARET MURPHY: I think it's around $820,000. All the figures are not in here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: New Brunswick, $820,000. So as you can see, those are significant costs compared to what the IEB initially told us it was, later confirmed for me at our last meeting when we were told that the IEB had not made any recommendation on budget. That was incorrect. When the IEB gave approval for this committee, they had indicated a preliminary budget of $100,000. Based on what's been done in other provinces, that figure doesn't seem to be realistic in order to be able to achieve what we've set out.
If you look at the budget outline that's been provided to us - I believe you each have a copy - we're now already in the range, based on our discussions, of approximately $170,000, and that's not including the issues raised by Mr. Steele last time about the possibility of having a research person assigned to the committee, and also the issue of polling which was discussed at our last meeting as well.
I did have the opportunity to speak to the Minister of Finance who - as do all Ministers of Finance - raised concern about the committee's budget being too high. But they were looking at what proposals our committee would put forward for the IEB's consideration.
I am hoping through this meeting, and though discussions with each of you as committee members, of getting a better sense of where we might be and having a proposed budget which we could work on and provide to the committee members and then have it submitted to the IEB in order for them to be able to indicate to us whether they are providing approval to our proposed budget.
Sherri is providing me with some of the additional figures that have been considered in part of some of our discussions, including the focus groups, and we're now looking at a figure of approximately $227,000 as a rough budget at this time. I'm wondering if members
[Page 3]
have any specific issues they want to discuss on the issue of the budget and any suggestions that they do have in assisting us in putting together a final budget. Minister Barnet.
MR. BARNET: First of all, a question. The $227,000 is the $177,000 plus the costs associated with research. Do you have a breakdown of that?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes and again, that's all information we'll provide to you, but based on what Communications Nova Scotia has provided us, if you look at the package from Communications Nova Scotia, there's an advertising component to it at the very back where it lists some of the potential advertising costs. I'll give you a chance to find that document.
You can see there on the list there's Volt Media, $5,000; pre-movie ads, $15,000; transit bus ads, $4,400; online advertising, $5,000 to $8,000, that has been added in here. We've also looked at the potential for focus groups which if you look under the polling information that was provided, it was suggested that rather than do polling that we would do focus groups . . .
MR. BARNET: Where do you see that? Sorry.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That would be on the second last page where it starts off with, "I talked to a communications group," and they're suggesting - and you'll see the costs in there - $32,000 in the second last paragraph. When you add all those in, that's where we come up with the figure of $227,000.
Again, that does not take into consideration the issue of a full-time researcher for this committee, and I'm looking for the committee's direction on that. It has been suggested to me that we should look within government services that are available to us now, whether it's through Communications Nova Scotia or another agency, to see if there's a possibility of having somebody assigned to work on this committee full-time in a research-type capacity, in order to try to keep the budget costs down as much as possible. That is something that I look forward to the comments of the committee members as to how we should proceed on the issue of having a researcher made available to us on a full-time basis for the duration of this committee's work. Mr. Barnet.
MR. BARNET: So on the list of the last page there, the $5,000, $15,000, $4,420, $5,000 for those other things, that's over and above the $40,000 that's already proposed - is that right? If you look down your list of your budget outline, you already have under Advertising, $40,000 for newspaper, radio ads and TV.
MR. CHAIRMAN: What happened there is that when that advertising was done, that would be your traditional advertising that has been done for committees in the past. Part of our discussion was looking at doing things a little bit different for this committee and trying
[Page 4]
to reach out even more to Nova Scotians on this issue, and that's why Communications Nova Scotia provided us with a bit more specifics about what could be done, which has not been part of the normal process of committee work in the past. So that's why you're seeing it as an additional cost over and above the proposed $40,000 for, I guess, what we could term to be more the traditional advertising that has been done in the past.
MR. BARNET: I was actually present when you were talking to the Minister of Finance and I saw the heart murmur that he almost had as he started to understand the cost consequences, as all Finance Ministers are concerned about the bottom line, the dollars. I know from the conversation you had with him and his expression of concern to me that he is concerned about the fact that this could balloon out of control and that he certainly would like to see the cost below $200,000, including a researcher and whatever is necessary. In fact what he said was below $175,000 would be better if that's possible and he said initially the proposed budget was, as you've said, $100,000.
[1:15 p.m.]
I wonder if there is some way that we could work with the numbers that we have and try to see if we can fit this in and use any existing staff or secondment-type arrangements to do that research. I don't know how that could be done or who would even be the appropriate person to do the kind of research that's being proposed. I wonder if there's a way that we can get this all inclusive so that when it goes back to IEB for an additional approval of funding, that it is all there and then there are no concerns after the fact.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I appreciate your comments. Unfortunately not having been at the Internal Economy Board when the discussion took place, I really have no idea how that $100,000 figure was achieved to start off with. Right now, this is our first opportunity to see what the costs have been in other provinces because really, there is no means for any of us around the table to have an overall sense of what the costs would be of this undertaking without seeing what has been done in other jurisdictions. Clearly, the numbers are coming in showing that $100,000 would not be realistic if we are to achieve what I believe has been the consensus around this table, that this is a committee of vital importance. Not questioning the importance of other committees, but if we're going to be able to achieve success we certainly have to do things a little differently than what has been done in the past.
What I would recommend as part of our submission to the Internal Economy Board is to give them the figures of what the costs were in other jurisdictions. Ironically, in a number of jurisdictions they used private citizens in order to do this and yet we're suggesting that it is MLAs that are being used for this. I would submit that there probably is a lower cost in going along that route because of the fact that we get paid already for the work that we do. It is hard to determine how we will end up comparing to other jurisdictions, but that is all information that we are trying to put together now.
[Page 5]
Again, looking at your proposed budget, and I'm curious if there are comments based on what Minister Barnet has said, if there are areas that we see from our proposed budget outline that we could already see of possibly cutting. I do see a provision for professional services for a report writer. There is a $15,000 figure there that may not be necessary if we can find someone from within government who can carry that out for us, again, whether it is through Communications Nova Scotia or one of the other agencies that can provide us with that service. There may be some opportunities there to find some savings.
I see, as well, for translation services there is a figure of $27,000. Again, it is difficult to say at this point because I think we've agreed we want to make translation services available where requested, but I don't see the need to have it if it is not requested, but for budgetary purposes it is very hard to determine what you should put in your budget when you really don't know what your requests are going to be. I think it is safe to say that all of us are hoping to be able to stay within budget and possibly come under budget, but in putting together a budget we need to be realistic as well. Hopefully, the Internal Economy Board will be realistic in that we may go over budget, through no fault of our own, but in the hopes of being able to make sure that we're able to carry out our work as best as possible.
MR. BARNET: Can I just add one more thing? Two more things I should say. Has there been a cost identified for research or is that just . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: If you look at the budget outline that is not even included in here, that was an issue for further discussion. Again, whether it is someone that we contract out or someone who is seconded to us, I have no issues with that and maybe that's something we can seek direction from either the Internal Economy Board or some other representative of government, whether it is Minister Baker or someone else who can provide us with potentially with some direction or recommendations in that regard for the committee to consider.
MR. BARNET: My final point is with respect to the last two bullets, the translation services, I wonder if wouldn't be worth our while to - and maybe this has already been done - check through Acadian Affairs to determine whether or not there is an opportunity to get the Government of Canada's support for translation of this document. I know they've done that in the past with some documents.
The second one is, further to what you said about the report writing and professional services, has there been any discussion with CNS to determine whether or not there is internally the ability to do that? I know that they do write reports on behalf of lots of departments and committees and that kind of stuff, so I would expect that there is capacity there and maybe we could check with them to determine what the cost impact would be if it was done internally rather than to hire a consultant to do it.
[Page 6]
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's right. Just a clarification for you, Mr. Barnet - the translation services you're seeing there would not be of the document, it's for our actual hearings. If there's a request at the hearings to provide a presentation in French, that's the cost that Legislative TV has put together, in conjunction with Acadian Affairs, of what it would cost to provide that service when we go out on the road.
What I was mentioning earlier is that it's extremely difficult to figure out what that cost will be because we don't know where we'll receive requests for that service. We may receive no requests for that service or we may receive it everywhere we go.
MR. BARNET: Or maybe the committee can simply select certain communities where they know there might be more requests and say, at these particular hearings translation services will be provided.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I'll leave it to you to make that recommendation, knowing the amount of French communities that exist throughout the province. I'm not sure how you'd be able to break that down but, again, that's something for the committee to consider and to make a decision on. If it is the committee's wish, we can certainly ask Communications Nova Scotia to provide us with some advice on both the issues of writing the report and possibly the research component as well, to see if they have the existing capability to do that or what their recommendations are on that. So if that's the committee's wish, I'm more than happy to have that correspondence sent to them and have the information brought back to us.
MR. JAMES MACINNES: If I may, perhaps that should be more correctly identified as interpretation services, rather than translation service.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, very good point. Is there any other discussion on the budget? Mr. Steele.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: It seems to me that the budget we have in front of us has been drawn up based on the typical select committee - nine members going out around the province, sitting at the front of a room with microphones, Legislative TV, interpretation services. I just repeat what I said last time - that doesn't seem to be the right model to get at what we're trying to get at here. If you think for just a minute that maybe this is not the right committee to do that kind of thing, then almost all of these costs disappear.
We're sort of taking it for granted, I think, that all nine of us together with staff support and Legislative TV are going to go out, travelling from community to community, and it is going to be recorded and translated and there's going to be a verbatim transcript. The question I ask myself is, is that really what we're going to do? I mean, aren't there other, better ways of doing this? Especially when we all agreed last time that the core difficulty we
[Page 7]
have is, we are trying to reach people who are disengaged from the process and having such a formal process is not the way to engage people who are already disengaged.
So to me, almost all of these costs are associated with that kind of select committee. I don't know about everybody around the table but some of you have been on select committees where you throw a party and nobody comes, right, and that's a tremendous amount of money. Maybe this is like the classic committee where that's exactly what we're going to see happen because the only people who are going to come out to that kind of a show are people who are already engaged, almost by definition. They have no fear of appearing at a table with a microphone and looking at nine elected officials and telling them what they think. I worry about that.
To me, the essential things that we need are some data, not just people's opinions, subjective opinions or anecdotes, but data which you get from polling and focus groups. That's why our political Parties do it, because it is hard data - it is not just people's impressions. A researcher, because a tremendous amount of stuff has been done on this very issue around the world and the way we keep our costs down is by finding out what everybody else has done, but none of us has the time or resources to do that. We can't read all those literally hundreds of reports that are out there and digest them and summarize them, we can't. So that is what the researcher is for.
To me, I sort of cross off almost all of this, almost all of it, and say let's get a researcher, let's get some polling data and let's at least consider travelling around the province maybe in threes, informally rather than the whole show of nine MLAs with full recording and interpretation.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Steele. Any other comments?
That's basically one of the main things we need to decide on this, because that will determine what our budget is going to look like. I know that Mr. Dunn and I had some discussions after the last committee meeting where we had even raised the prospect that you could still do the formal hearings, yet possibly in the afternoon when we would be meeting in a certain area, that it could be arranged, the focus group, through bringing together potentially some high school students, university students, community college students, and at that point you'd be able to break down into smaller groups of just possibly two or three MLAs, meeting with them - not in a recorded session, but more of a focus group in an informal setting - to be able to find out exactly why it is that people are not voting and any suggestions that they do have.
So I don't know, Mr. Steele, if it's a hybrid system we should be looking at, of maintaining some form of the traditional process while, at the same time, throwing in the approach that you're suggesting, which I think there's agreement on as well, of doing more informal discussions at the same time. By doing it both on the same day, it cuts down on
[Page 8]
costs and where we're already in the community, it allows us to do that type of work in the afternoon while in the evening still allowing for the formal part of it.
One concern I would have is that I think it's important that Nova Scotians who are watching this be able to know what is being presented to this committee from the different parts of the province and from different individuals. By not having any recording services, it makes it impossible for us to be able to share with an individual in Yarmouth who may want to know what type of presentations we received in Halifax or received in Sydney, if we are not doing the traditional recording services as well.
So what I'm looking for, I guess, is a way for us to be able to combine both the traditional way and a bit of the more modern way, if I could use that term in describing what Mr. Steele has brought forward to the committee. I'm just curious what comments there might be on that. Mr. Barnet.
MR. BARNET: Well, you know I'm intrigued by what was said, and as you were speaking I picked up the list of places that the committee could visit. Behind that is a list of other select committees: the National Unity Committee, the Workers' Compensation Act. When you add the number of people who actually appeared at these select committees, I have to tell you that it's a very small number of people who've appeared to present their concerns or ideas to a variety of different governments, on some very important topics.
I'm kind of wondering if the approach is not necessarily the right approach. Maybe there should be a way that we look at taking some - if it's about reaching out to people who don't vote and to try to encourage them to vote and find out why they're not voting, I understand what Mr. Steele is saying. I can see how people would be intimidated by the process, how only those who are engaged would actually show up, and this isn't about those who are engaged because they come out and vote anyway. This is about all of those other people, the other 50 per cent of Nova Scotians. So maybe an approach has to be different and if you do a different approach, it changes the whole scope of this budget.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. MacDonald.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I'm all for sort of reducing those formal kinds of meetings. You know I've been there and I know how it's not satisfying for committee members when you go and not very many people come. It really is a big cost for a very small return. So I think we do need to look at reducing the number of meetings we do across the province and bringing the size of what it is that we do.
[1:30 p.m.]
I don't know if the budget that we have, the $170,000, is predicated on 12 meetings across the province. It sort of seems to me that's - is that what it is? Is it sort of based on the
[Page 9]
understanding that we go to 12 different places, maybe metro is one of those and then outside, so we're talking about 11, is that . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think it's based on 12 days, it might not be 12 separate locations, but it's based on 12 full days.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: So this idea of front-loading our budget for research and opinion focus groups or whatever, to try to get better information and then organizing ourselves in a less formal way - I like that idea much more. I think it will be more effective for us.
The other thing I would want us to think about is to combine our researcher and our writer, to have the researcher be the report writer and to be very much engaged in the process from beginning to end as a person who develops a lot of the information expertise and what have you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Theriault.
MR. HAROLD THERIAULT: Why not use local organizations in communities to do this work? I'll give you an example. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans worked on owner-operator policy for three years with formally trying to get information out of fishermen. Just recently, down home in our area, the federal government put a person around who knew the fishermen, knew the community and they got more information out of that one little organization than they collected in three years formally. The people in the community, there are groups. I know groups home who could do this and hold these sessions and get this information, as long as they know the questions that need asking.
Maybe that's the way to go - let the communities themselves do this if that could be organized. It would be a lot cheaper, too.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Those are the types of ideas we're trying to achieve. I guess it's down to a question of how do we achieve that goal and I think from our previous discussions, when we look at the statistics from other committees, our whole goal here is not to achieve those same statistics. The question is, what can we do to not achieve those same statistics and how can we achieve better success and get more input?
I think what I'm hearing from Ms. MacDonald is maybe if we do a bit more on the research side of what has been done in the other jurisdictions and that information would be provided to us, that we potentially look at doing some polling data before determining exactly how it is that we go out and find the best way to engage Nova Scotians on this.
I think that comes back to the earlier suggestion that we do ask Communications Nova Scotia to identify for us whether they can provide a researcher and report writer, and
[Page 10]
also on the recommendation of doing the preliminary polling in order for the committee to better determine what is the best way for us to be able to engage Nova Scotians. I think it's clear it's only at that point that we'll be able to talk about a budget and talk about what format we want to use.
I think we're all united in wanting to achieve success. I think the question is now, how do we go about achieving that success, rather than making decisions we're then stuck with and trying to make a system work that we all fear may not work? Mr. Steele then Mr. Dunn.
MR. STEELE: Something you said, Mr. Chairman, just made me think of something. Maybe we can do this the reverse of the normal select committee, which is we go out and wait to see who shows up. What if we - at the front end - did a lot of advertising, got the message out about who we are and what we're looking for, give people an opportunity to send in written submissions or a Web site where they can just write in a comment or something like that, and then we may get a sense of where the interest is and something may so peak our interest that we say, let's go out to that community and explore this further. It might lead us to going to some places that we never usually thought of before.
We know the select committee usually ends up in the same place; if you're going to the Valley, you usually go to Kentville, you know how it goes. We may get new and different ideas of locations and people to talk to based on the response we get back, but in order to do that we have to do the front-end spending on things like advertising, setting up a discussion forum on a Web site and giving people that opportunity to feed into us first. Then we decide who goes, how many of us go, what kind of format we would have once we get there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's a very reasonable suggestion and I think it's something we need to discuss. I think one of the benefits with that, Mr. Steele, is the fact we've given ourselves sufficient time to complete this that we can actually do what you're suggesting and we're not under the rush of trying to make all of this work. That might just be a means of avoiding the previous disappointments from the traditional ways. Mr. Dunn.
MR. PATRICK DUNN: I'm going to read Graham's note again because that's exactly what I was going to refer to, what he was saying there. I believe he mentioned earlier that to follow the traditional route that most groups do, I think will be very unsuccessful. Yes, we have to take our show on the road and so on, but I think the focus group when we arrive should be prepared prior to us arriving.
Perhaps we should be getting beforehand, as he was mentioning, some of the work completed by focusing in on and getting some assistance through the schools and colleges, and so on, with our political science groups, our leadership class groups. We give them the information asking for their assistance - here's what we're looking for, are you willing to accommodate us - and when we do arrive, they're already engaged and ready for us. Keep
[Page 11]
it very informal in a very informal setting and try to get away from this type of situation where, like you were mentioning, coming in, sitting around at a table with mics and everything else. But I think we might be successful in getting a lot of good things happening prior to us even leaving and heading out and if we're successful in doing that, they're already engaged and we might be a little more successful as far as the data that we'll collect from them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bain.
MR. KEITH BAIN: Mr. Chairman, I guess this is the time when we're sharing everybody's notes, I guess, because that's the first thing that came to my mind was political science students in the universities. What an excellent way to start the process going by involving them. I think the interest that they show will expand, and it's not just on the university campuses. I was thinking political science students and I don't want to say it's a cheap way, but it's a good way of getting the word out.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bain.
So if I'm hearing correctly, basically the committee is looking for more information as to how we can better determine what the best way is for us to be able to carry out the functions of this committee. I'm going to ask all of our supporting agencies to turn their minds to that as well, to any ideas that you might have. I look forward to any suggestions that you may bring to us as well. Again, I think it's going to be vital at this point to hear from Communications Nova Scotia and any other agencies that may be able to assist us as to how we can start putting the research together and again, looking at any suggestions as to whether we should put up the Web site right away and start eliciting some feedback and trying to get a better sense of what it is that people would like to see.
I'm always cognizant of the fact of what Mr. Steele has pointed out, that the people who respond to us immediately are the people who are engaged and we must keep that in mind that we need to reach out to the people who are not responding, who are not participating. The question is, how do we get their attention? How do we get them to share with us what their concerns are? What might actually make a difference as to whether they do go vote or don't?
At this point, we can't continue to have organizational meetings non-end. We all have very busy schedules and while we do have a generous time frame, it's going to be a lot of information to process and a lot of work to be done in order to meet that time frame as well, in that regard.
So basically at this point on our agenda the items for locations of public hearings and a communications strategy is really moot at this point, based on the discussions I've heard up to now as to what information the committee is looking for prior to it being able to make
[Page 12]
any of those final decisions, unless there are some comments that members want to provide at this point. It seems like we're all looking for more information prior to making those final decisions, and unfortunately our budget remains up in the air until such time as we are able to make a final decision as to what approach we're going to take.
I realize that none of us want to see this committee not achieve great success, but at the end of the day we need the committee to move forward, and all hope that we've put together a process that's going to achieve some success and allow us to bring forward some significant recommendations. So are there any other comments from the committee members? Ms. MacDonald.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm just wondering, for clarity, what is it that we'll be looking to Communications Nova Scotia for in terms of personnel? Do they have people who have the research skills to be able to do the research, to pull together what's already known about this topic and other jurisdictions, or in fact in our own jurisdiction around voting rates and what has been occurring and what the trends are and that kind of stuff?
I think it's really important that we have somebody who is able to gather that information and to sort of synthesize it down - because chances are it's going to be a lot of information - and to really present it to us in a way that sort of makes it easy to understand what it is that we already know. It seems to me that it's an important thing not only for us to have, but then for everybody else to have in terms of how we communicate, what it is that the committee is going to be asking people in the province to respond to and to have the conversation about. It will inform the Web site, I think it will do a lot of those things.
So that's the first thing I'm wondering, that we make sure we have somebody who isn't only a communicator in terms of being able to have the skills of taking information, but actually developing the information and synthesizing the information, getting the right information, getting the focus that we want, the analysis that we need and that kind of stuff. That would be my only question and concern, I guess - that we make sure we have that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, and I think that's what the request will be. We do already have Dave here who is with us from Communications Nova Scotia, but Dave already has a role that he will play in the traditional support for the committee, from a communications standpoint.
I think what we're going to ask Communications Nova Scotia is, can you identify, either within Communications Nova Scotia or within government, an individual who would have the experience on the research side and on the report writing side, who would be able to work with the committee and provide information?
[Page 13]
I think your point is a valid point in that it's not a communications person we're looking for. We have Dave here and he is our communications person, but we're looking for someone different - unless Dave has all the qualifications to do exactly what we just said, which I don't know. I don't want to prejudge Dave's qualifications or anything else in that regard, but I hear your point and I think it's a valid one to make and we will certainly convey that.
It may be someone who comes from our Library system, who comes from another agency, it may be someone completely different and maybe there are some recommendations that Margaret can provide us with as well, from the Library standpoint.
[1:45 p.m.]
I think the message from Mr. Steele at earlier meetings is that we don't need a part-time person. We need someone who's going to be committed to this job until the first of September, when that report is done and it's tabled, unless somehow we get it done prior to that, but we need someone who's going to be dedicated to this. Whether there's an existing person or whether we have to go outside, I think that's something we should at least ask first, and hopefully there is someone from within and that will certainly help us with our costs and keep those costs down.
I'm also going to ask Communications Nova Scotia - through Dave and through everyone else there, based on the discussions that have taken place today - what are their recommendations as to how we can achieve what we're looking to achieve. Is there a means for us to get input prior to the committee even making a decision as to how we're going to go out and leave the HRM area and try to get feedback from Nova Scotians, and what is the best way of doing that?
I think, hopefully, Dave and the staff at Communications Nova Scotia and the rest of our support groups may be able to bring us recommendations as to how we might be able to do that. I think it is a great approach and hopefully one that will allow us to achieve better success, rather than sitting at a meeting and waiting for someone to show up who may not show up. I've sat on some of the select committees where that's happened and it's extremely disappointing for the committee, and for us as elected officials as well.
I think from what I'm hearing, that's where we need to go next. We need to get those proposals, recommendations to come forward. Ms. McCulloch is here, as Chief Electoral Officer. There may be some recommendations as well that may come from Elections Nova Scotia as part of the data that you have that can be shared with this committee, and any approaches as to how or whether you've done focus groups or polling or information along those same lines that might be of use to this committee.
[Page 14]
So I don't think any of us are looking to duplicate work that may have already been done. We want to keep our costs in line and any information that already exists, we're more than happy to obtain it, that might be there. Do you want to add something?
MS. CHRISTINE MCCULLOCH: If I may, I have established relationships with all of the electoral offices across Canada, well established, and access to all of the Chief Electoral Officers. We have a tool that we use to inquire of other jurisdictions specific questions.
I have a lot of background in electoral engagement. So I think that this is a very specialized and complex area and what you will find when you look at the research is that it's a waste of time to ask people why they don't vote because they will say, why would I? Generally that's often the response and I mean no disrespect, but this question has been asked many times in many environments. It's a complex question, there are no easy fixes and if you look at the research and the changes that have been made across this country and internationally, you will see that it is a long-term problem. It's not something that you can implement a couple of changes and people will rush to the polls. Engagement is about participation in your community, it's about caring about things - it's a much bigger question than, why don't you vote.
I would be happy to work with anyone, any researcher that's identified. I can't take that on myself, but I would be happy to support that role. I am able to get a lot of information; I can get statistics on anything you want. Nova Scotia hasn't in the past collected a lot of statistics - I mean, we have voter turnout statistics from way back. We know it's going down, they don't help you very much. In 2006 was the first time, that was the first general election that we collected voter turnout stats based on gender and age, for instance. So Nova Scotia hasn't done a lot of that, that's a new project for my organization.
I'm also in the process of restructuring Elections Nova Scotia, to modernize it, to give it a focus that has a much broader base than simply conducting elections. That, in itself, is an operational role that's very important, but all of the jurisdictions across this country that have elections offices have a mandate in this area because it's huge and it's a problem for everyone. So there are things that I think we can sort through in the research to give some focus to this committee that if you choose to go around the province, it might make that kind of response more useful.
Voter participation is interesting, because you can focus on accessibility issues which are relatively straightforward to respond to, and you can focus on voter engagement and they're quite different. Engaged people tend to vote, it's the unengaged that don't vote, so you can make accessibility to the voting environment very good and you still aren't going to answer this problem. So there is a great deal of information I can provide to this committee and I would be pleased to do that.
[Page 15]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you and I think we all share the frustrations that you share and the fact that it is impossible to force people to vote, but certainly, I think, based on the last number of elections as a province, we realize that something at least needs to be attempted to address those issues. If we can somehow start reversing the trend I think it would be a tremendous success for us and in light of the fact that many other jurisdictions have turned their minds to this as well, hopefully we might be able to find some innovative new approaches that may re-engage Nova Scotians a bit more than they currently are. Thank you for those comments. Mr. Theriault, did you have your hand up?
MR. HAROLD THERIAULT: I didn't know whether to say anything or not - this is my first meeting here and excuse me if it's a dumb question - but we, as MLAs, are looking for the reason why people aren't voting. I could give you a list, a whole page full - and I'm sure every one of us around this table should be able to - of why people don't go out and vote. I won't get into that list right now, but I'm just asking that question. I think we can already answer that question, a lot of it, of why people don't go out and vote because I hear it every day.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think it is safe to say we're in agreement that we all know many of the reasons why they don't. I think . . .
MR. THERIAULT: It's how to win them back, I think is the question.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is what our committee is trying to find ways of doing. I think, as I mentioned to the media, the fact that it is elected officials who are trying to find ways to have more people voting sends a very strong message. Cynics out there would believe that the minute we're elected we're happy to be elected and the last thing we need to do is have more people voting who may not vote for us. But the fact that as elected officials, we are saying that we realize that a strong democracy requires Nova Scotians to be engaged and that we're not as strong a democracy as we should be when you only have a 60 per cent voter turnout and almost half of your population is not engaged in the process - that is not the sign of a strong, healthy, working democracy. The fact that it is elected officials doing this, I think, sends the right message and it sends the message that we want to hear why it is that people are disengaged and what can we do to re-engage them.
MR. THERIAULT: I think we know why.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The question is, how do we get them back? How do we get them voting is what I think we're all out to try to achieve. Mr. Steele and then Mr. Dunn.
MR. STEELE: I was going to propose that at some future meeting of the select committee fairly soon that we have a session with the Chief Electoral Officer so that she can tell us the base of information. What do we know? What are the statistics? What don't we know? I'm really pleased you're here and I have a thousand questions I would like to ask you
[Page 16]
although today is not the day to do it, but I wonder if we could have a formal session with the Chief Electoral Officer reasonably soon?
MR. CHAIRMAN: While we're asking Communications Nova Scotia to get that information and all of our support organizations that are here helping us with this, in fact, after Ms. McCulloch spoke I was going to recommend she be our first witness. It may be a good suggestion that while we're waiting for determination as to how we're going to go about this, I think it would be very useful to get the information from Ms. McCulloch and have the opportunity - as you said you had quite a few questions. I certainly have lots myself and I'm sure everyone around the table has lots of questions they would like to ask as well, which may be very helpful in helping us determine exactly - and I'm very curious about the statistics from the last election which, I'm sure, would be very telling, that you've been able to keep track of gender and some other information from the last election which would be good for us to be able to review and to question as well.
While we're waiting for that other information, if I'm hearing correctly what you're saying, Mr. Steele, the recommendation is that we do schedule our next meeting to have Ms. McCulloch and any of her staff that she wishes to make available to make a presentation to this committee in light of what we're looking to achieve, and be available to answer questions. Is it agreed that that is what we pursue for our next meeting?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes, agreed.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dunn, you had your hand up.
MR. DUNN: Just a quick comment. I would like to think that a possible solution to the woes of people not turning up at the polls and so on - this disengagement - is through education, through our schools. If they're not engaged in their community, they're not involved in their community, therefore I think what is happening is what we're seeing.
I can think of a particular high school I was at and at the high school level, they have a leadership course. This particular group of 30 people year after year are completely engaged in their community, they are out there, they're involved in all different aspects of their community and so on. They know what is going on in their community, name a club, they're aware of it, they are out there and they're engaged, they're working with them, they're involved on a very small level in town politics and so on. That particular group is fairly focused compared to other groups in the school and I just think of that leadership course. I think through education, through school, at least it is an avenue where we might be able to see some possible light.
MR. CHAIRMAN: On that, Mr. Dunn, my thought would be somewhere along the way that we would invite the Department of Education to make a presentation to us as well to let us know what they are doing right now as part of curriculum development and what is
[Page 17]
being made available. I think, looking around the table, all of us have been out of the school system for a little while and I wouldn't want to try to judge as to what exactly is taking place now in the classroom. It may be an idea whether we do it before or following the Chief Electoral Officer, I think it would be a very good suggestion to bring in representatives from the Department of Education.
We often talk about the need to put more resources in the classroom when it comes to these issues, but when one makes that recommendation one has to know that to put more in you have to take something out somewhere. I think it is important that we hear from the Department of Education so when we talk of different proposals, whether it's model parliaments, whether it is making it a mandatory part of a civics course, that we understand the impact of that, both the benefit and the impact. I think after we've met with the Chief Electoral Officer it may be an idea that we then ask the Department of Education officials to present to us on that issue as well. Mr. Barnet.
MR. BARNET: On the theme of inviting people I wonder if it wouldn't be helpful to see if somebody at Communications Nova Scotia - maybe the Executive Director, Laura Lee Langley - could come and appear before the committee to provide the committee with at least an overview of what it is that CNS can do in terms of the suite of things that they can do, as well as some advice around engaging Nova Scotians on the key questions around why it is they do or don't vote. It would seem to me that at a very early meeting to help with the development of the budget, that might be something that would be good advice to invite the executive director to answer the questions that have been asked here today about what their capacity is around writing a report, around advertising, particularly the non-traditional advertising and as well, what they offer with respect to research and what advice she can give around engaging Nova Scotians. That might be very beneficial in terms of actually developing your final budget.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Based on what you're suggesting, Mr. Barnet, if I could make the recommendation for the consideration of the committee members that at our next meeting we would start off with Ms. Langley making a presentation on behalf of Communications Nova Scotia for possibly the first half hour. We could ask questions and get that information at that point. I think we could put a request through Dave that the information and recommendations be provided to us beforehand and then she would be available to answer questions and potentially provide us with some recommendations, as you suggested. The rest of the meeting would be dedicated to our Chief Electoral Officer's presentation and Mr. Steele's multiple questions that he wishes to pose to our Chief Electoral Officer.
If it is the committee's wish, I would recommend we combine the two and that would give us a good footing to start the process by finding out from Ms. Langley and Dave - from Communications Nova Scotia - and then going straight into the presentation of the Chief Electoral Officer. Is that agreed? It is agreed.
[Page 18]
Ms. MacDonald, you had a comment.
[2:00 p.m.]
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I'm wondering, as well, if we might not be able to identify people in the political science departments who have studied this particular issue. I'm sure there are people. Perhaps you could help us in that regard if there are any local people, particularly with a focus on what works, what jurisdictions seem to not have the problems that we have or certainly that maybe don't have them to the same magnitude.
I know that there are places that have been working on this a lot longer. I think the U.K., for example, identified the drop in voter turnout maybe 20 years ago and they've been running campaigns for a long time to try to improve voter turnout among young people, among people from racially visible communities that might not have been participating at the same rate as other people.
If we can identify some people who can help bring us information about what has been done, has it been effective, where are we finding jurisdictions that have better voter turnouts, I think that would be very helpful as well to just inform ourselves.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think that goes back to the suggestion earlier of trying to find recommendations about how best to do our committee. I do believe that's a very good recommendation of approaching, whether it be political science professors throughout Nova Scotia, we can identify superintendents of school boards, to see what their recommendations may be as to what they feel would be effective ways of us being able to engage students and get them to make recommendations. I think that's all an essential part of us getting that feedback.
What I would recommend on that, Ms. MacDonald, is that following the presentation by Ms. Langley, that at that point we will make final decisions as to how we're going to seek out recommendations and input from stakeholders as to what is the best means for us to be able to get that information. I certainly think that's a very valid approach and one that we could turn around fairly quickly and get those requests out to them in a short period of time and hopefully get feedback from them as well.
Based on that, the question is, when should our committee meet again? The House is going in on November 22nd. The afternoon of November 15th is available to us right now - Thursday, November 15th in the afternoon, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Let me ask the committee members now, is there an objection to Thursdays? Is another day a better day in trying to meet the objectives of the committee? Is it safe to say that every caucus meets on Wednesdays? Ms. MacDonald, can you confirm - someone said that your caucus sometimes varies between Tuesday and Wednesday.
[Page 19]
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: It's mostly Wednesday.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It's mostly always Wednesday. Just nailing down that date. Mr. Bain.
MR. BAIN: Mr. Chairman, personally I feel Thursdays are best because I know in our caucus we have most committee meetings on Tuesday or Wednesday anyway, and possibly Thursday mornings but Thursday afternoons are the best for us.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thursday afternoon is best for you. I'm not hearing any objections to Thursday afternoon. It is always difficult to find a time that meets everyone's schedule, I'm very cognizant of that. Let's try it again for another Thursday afternoon and if there's any recommendations from committee members then we'll certainly entertain those at that time.
Right now we are scheduled for Thursday, November 15th, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Before we finish, I'll recognize Mr. Steele who has some information to share with us. Mr. Steele.
MR. STEELE: Thank you. Just to whet the committee members' appetites for what's ahead of us and with their indulgence, I just want to take a few minutes to run quickly through some statistical information about Nova Scotia elections. This is all provided by the Elections Nova Scotia Web site - it is all publicly available. The sixth column on the first page is the voter turnout since 1960.
One of the things that really surprised me when I saw it is that this is not a story of a gradual decline. There is more or less a steady turnout through nine elections, from 1963 to 1993 and then a fairly sharp and sudden decline, a sharp decline in the 1998 election and another sharp decline in the 2006 election which naturally leads to the question, what went on here between 1993 and 2006 - in only 13 years, we lost 16 per cent of the voters. I am not claiming that I have the answer - I'm just saying these are the kinds of things we might want to turn our minds to.
If you flip over to the second page, which is a summary by riding of the 2006 election, you can see that the overall voter turnout really masks an enormous variation within the province. There is no problem with voter turnout in Clare, they were at a remarkable 82 per cent, and the next closest one is Richmond, no doubt because of their enthusiasm for their member, at 71 per cent, followed by Inverness at 70 per cent. But then you see the lowest is Halifax Clayton Park at 48.84 per cent. You say to yourself, well what's going on in Clare, where they clearly have no problem getting their people out to vote.
If you flip over, it's even more marked, the third page is the 2003 election where you have, I believe, 10 or 11 ridings over 70 per cent turnout. The riding of Inverness in that
[Page 20]
election, an amazing 91.83 per cent voter turnout in 2003. There is no problem with voter turnout in Inverness County.
MR. BARNET: No need to go there.
MR. STEELE: You see that's a very good point, exactly. Maybe part of what we should do is go to places that select committees don't usually go, like Inverness and Clare, and say, what's going on? I mean Annapolis, Antigonish, Argyle, all are very high. It's not just an urban thing because one of the lower ridings, for example, is Truro-Bible Hill, which is down below 60 per cent. But again, in the 2003 election, Halifax Clayton Park was the lowest and for those of us who know the area, you can say it has probably one of the highest percentages of new Canadians - a lot of people who have moved in very recently.
I think each one of our MLAs probably has some understanding of what's going on in their own riding because if you flip over again, I've included the breakdown for a few ridings and you see that even within ridings there's an enormous variation between different polls. I was talking about this with Mr. Barnet earlier and he was remarking that even this masks something because people have various voting options where it might appear they didn't show up on election day but, of course, they did vote.
You look at the one for Richmond, for example, which has a very high voter turnout, the highest is Poll 15, at 75 per cent, but then you've got Poll 21, the Chapel Island Community Centre, down at 40 per cent. So obviously within that riding there is a great variation.
Flip over the page to Halifax Needham where the average turnout was much lower but you have Poll 22 voting at almost 73 per cent and then you have others that are barely above 20 per cent. I'm sure the member there has some idea of why that should be.
Then you flip over to the riding of Kings North - I was hoping the member for Kings North would be here - but again I wanted to get a riding in a different area of the province and you have Poll 40 voting at almost 75 per cent and Poll 18 down at 37 per cent. So this is what I saw when I looked at just the most superficial level of the data, that the average turnout masks huge variations within the province and that, in turn, masks huge variations within ridings. I certainly would like to explore with the members of the committee and with the Chief Electoral Officer some of the reasons why this might be happening.
The last one, which I hope members will find more amusing than anything else, is the election in which I was first elected, in the by-election of 2001 which, if you flip to the last page, had the abysmal voter turnout of 27.45 per cent. I verified that is the lowest turnout, at least within the last 30 years because I didn't go back any further. This is probably one of the lowest voter turnouts of any election probably in Nova Scotia's history and you know that it is not because of a lack of enthusiasm for the member. (Laughter)
[Page 21]
I included that because you see that is an incredibly low turnout, what is wrong with Halifax Fairview? But what you need to know is that voting day that day was one of the very worst days of the winter. There was a blizzard blowing from the time the polls opened to the time the polls closed. We could not drag people out of their homes to vote that day. The roads were almost impassable, it's amazing that that many people got out to vote.
There was another by-election in Cape Breton North the same day, but the weather up there was much better and the voter turnout was much higher. Anybody who doesn't take into account the weather when analyzing that number is really missing the story of why the voter turnout was so bad that day, it was absolutely a dreadful day and the member for Halifax Needham remembers that because she helped poll the vote. I pleaded with people to come to vote and they just said no, I'm not leaving my house today and I didn't blame them a bit.
Anyway, I hope this sort of gives you some idea of some of the questions we need to look at. It might be little things like the weather on voting day, it might be bigger things like why do all the Acadian ridings have such a remarkably high turnout, things like that that maybe we need to take a look at. So that's it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Steele. I can share with you that as a member who comes from a riding which has had a traditionally high turnout, for example, last election it was 71 per cent and my first election was 82 per cent, so we've seen a significant drop. We're trying to figure out what happened, but you did point out Chapel Island. I can share with you that that has been a chronic problem for years and years and one that, I think if you looked at other ridings you would see where unfortunately it has been very difficult to engage our Native community in provincial elections. It's a bit better at the federal elections but even there the numbers are still dismal to say the least. I think that is a very interesting look at the statistics and some of the interesting challenges that are faced not only provincially, but within our own ridings as well. Again, I think that's the type of information, once we do have a researcher in place, that will be able to provide us with those types of considerations.
I think, too, Ms. McCulloch, when we spoke at our last meeting, I think our returning officers throughout this province are going to be very resourceful for us at being able to identify some of the challenges within our own ridings, that we might not even see but they've seen. I know in my case, my returning officer has been in place for almost 20 years, so he has certainly seen many elections and has a great deal of experience to speak of. I know many of our returning officers have that same level of experience.
Thank you for that, Mr. Steele, and if there are no further comments I would move that the committee now adjourn to meet again on November 15th from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Thank you.
[Page 22]
[The committee adjourned at 2:13 p.m.]
