EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Recommendation #9: That a working group be established, composed of representatives from the Government of Nunavut, NTI, Regional Inuit Organizations, the Nunavut Association of Municipalities, Elections Canada and other organizations which administer elections at the local level such as District Education Authorities and Housing Associations, to negotiate the details of how the central elections office would best meet the needs of different organizations.
Recommendation #10: There should be a Chief Electoral Officer of Nunavut appointed by the Legislative Assembly, in consultation with NTI, Regional Inuit Organizations, the Nunavut Association of Municipalities and Elections Canada.
The position should be advertised to the public and the selection process should be competency-based and transparent.
The Chief Electoral Officer should be a permanent position with the responsibility to establish the central elections office and co-ordinate and chair the working group.
Recommendation #11: That a review be undertaken by the working group of differences in election procedures with a view to making recommendations for harmonizing the procedures where possible and making elections easier for voters in Nunavut to participate in.
Recommendation #12: That the working group consider the responsibilities of the central elections office and the working relationships with the various stakeholders and make recommendations concerning the best location for the office and its core staff.
(ii) A Permanent List of Electors
The Standing Committee heard from many people about the difficulties of enumeration in Nunavut, including the following:
high mobility of residents and the number of new people moving from the South;
difficulties in getting people at home;
the presence of dogs;
lack of receptivity of some residents;
lack of Inuktitut forms and lack of Inuktitut lists of names;
lack of trained enumerators in all communities; turnover of enumerators; and lack of diligence of some enumerators;
misspelling of names;
low salary for enumerators; etc.
It meant that the election list was not complete.
Many new residents had to be sworn in at the polls on election day, contributing to long line-ups and causing concern as to whether all safeguards had been observed by election staff.
In some communities, voter turnout was much more than 100% due to the problems with the original enumeration list.
At the same time, it was noted that if people don't see their name on the list or it is incorrectly spelled, they sometimes don't vote or get themselves registered to be able to vote.
A great concern expressed by many people is that it is crucial that the names of deceased people be deleted from election lists as it causes great pain to the families when they see these names on the list.
The CEO's report echoed these concerns, recommending that additional enumerators be hired if needed.
During its meetings with Elections Canada, the Standing Committee learned a great deal about the National Register of Electors that has been developed for federal elections.
This Register is updated from the names provided by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), due to a check-off box on the annual income tax form.
Information is also obtained from Citizenship and Immigration, Drivers Licences and various provincial electoral agencies, in order to update the list on a quarterly basis.
The Standing Committee was advised that Elections Canada presently had over 11,000 names on the Register for the federal electoral district of Nunavut.
Elections Canada has various agreements with other provincial and territorial jurisdictions to share their election lists and also to share other sources of data, such as motor vehicles registration and license information to ensure the Register is complete and accurate and the Register is updated every few months.
It was noted in the CEO's report that an agreement was entered into for Nunavut and that the Nunavut first election was able to use the Elections Canada Automated Preliminary List of Electors (ECAPLE).
However, a number of difficulties were noted.
Although candidates were given discs of the election lists, the software was not easy to use and if this were to be used in the future, Members suggested that basic software that many people are familiar with and would be on computers in the community, such as Microsoft Access, should be used.
A number of inadequacies were noted about the ECAPLE list, including the fact that names of deceased people were on the list and names were misspelled which led to confusion for some voters.
Members also noted that it is very difficult for some Nunavut residents to check the list for accuracy, as the names are only in English.
Elections Canada advised the Standing Committee that they would be very interested in working with the Government of Nunavut and others to ensure that the names for Nunavut are complete and accurate.
This may also make it possible to help ensure that the list is also able to be prepared in Inuktitut and Innuinaqtun [for Cambridge Bay and Kugluktuk], a recommendation the Standing Committee also made to Elections Canada.
Nunavut is like many others jurisdictions in Canada, insofar as people move frequently between elections.
The challenge is to keep up with the changes.
Maintaining lists is very costly and keeping them up-to-date requires staff and data.
In Nunavut, there are many lists.
NTI keeps a list of Inuit beneficiaries.
The municipalities have local lists of residents for tax purposes.
There are various lists kept by government that are updated as people move, such as health cards, motor vehicle registration and driving licence data.
The Standing Committee notes that the Province of Quebec uses their health card identity information in updating their electoral lists.
All of these lists are maintained by staff and there are various procedures to keep them updated.
Together, it should be possible to develop a preliminary list of electors that is more comprehensive than what we currently have to work with through the enumeration process.
Recommendation #13: That the Government of Nunavut should establish a permanent voters' list.
Recommendation #14: That the Government of Nunavut should enter into a protocol with Elections Canada to share elector data from the National Registry of Electors and explore what Nunavut lists may be utilized and shared, including with other organizations in Nunavut, for the purposes of updating the voters' list to be used for elections purposes.
Recommendation #15: That the software for maintaining and updating a permanent voters’ list should be basic and accessible to all potential users, including candidates and all levels of government or organizations who may use or contribute data to the list.
Recommendation #16: That the Government of Nunavut should examine the privacy issues relating to the creation of a permanent voters’ list, ensuring that voters who do not wish to be included for safety or other reasons can be deleted and that there are sufficient safeguards and penalties for use of the list for any other purpose than elections; an opinion from the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut should also be obtained on these matters.
Recommendation #17: That as recommended by the CEO, an elector transfer certificate should be developed for use by voters who move after revision day.
(iii) Timing of Elections
There were several issues raised that relate to timing of elections: the time of year, the time of the week and the number of elections on one day.
The first Nunavut election took place in February.
Many local elections take place in December.
The public input to the Standing Committee on this matter was very clear.
Elections should not be held in winter, when it is very cold and difficult for some people to get around the community.
They also should not be held in the summer or during the spring hunt.
There was almost a universal consensus that elections in Nunavut should take place in the fall, when hunters are back in the community and the conditions are not yet suitable for going on the land by ski-doo.
One person suggested the last week of November and others told us that the time the Standing Committee was doing its public consultation at the end of September was a good time for their community.
Recommendation #18: That general elections in Nunavut should be held in October or November.
By law, most elections are held on a Monday. The Standing Committee was advised that this may be difficult for some people in Nunavut.
Because of the salaried work force, many families can now only go on the land on weekends.
If the weather is very good, or if the weather is very bad, people may be delayed getting back to their community.
The Committee was advised that it may be preferable to have election day during mid-week.
This would also ensure that election officials are able to do office related duties the day before the election and it would be better to not be a Sunday, which is a day of worship for many Nunavummiut.
Recommendation #19: That elections in Nunavut be held mid-week, preferably on a Wednesday.
Many people expressed concern about the scheduling of elections, particularly municipal elections, which are often held on the same day as NTI and RIO elections, as well as other local bodies such as Housing Associations.
Sometimes, plebiscite questions are also presented at the same time.
This has not been such an issue for territorial elections.
However, people in different communities told us that they find this practice confusing, particularly if one person is a candidate for more than one election.
They said they would prefer that different elections be held on different days.
The Standing Committee is mindful that the reasons for holding elections in this manner largely relate to cost-savings and administrative efficiencies.
However, as work towards coordinating the election efforts of various bodies and levels of government in Nunavut continues, the Standing Committee would hope that the overlap of elections can be minimized and that other options for cost savings be used.
Recommendation #20: That to the best extent possible, a maximum of three elections and/or plebiscites should occur on any one day.
(iv) The Duration of the Election Period
The current period for an election in the Elections Act is 45 days.
A number of Members observed to the Standing Committee that the duration of the election period is too long.
One person commented in a public meeting that the period is too short and several Hamlet councils also observed that the election period is long.
The CEO made a number of recommendations for shortening the elections period, both in his report on the Nunavut first election, as well as his report on the subsequent NWT election.
The CEO recommended that the election period be dropped from 45 days to 35 days in his NWT report. While the NWT has a few differences, notably the presence of roads making it easier for candidates and election officials to travel between communities, the Standing Committee is of the opinion that the election period could be shortened in Nunavut as well.
Recommendation #21: That the election period be shortened from 45 days to 35 days.
There are several time periods in the election process that would need to be changed if the election period were to be shortened.
The Members considered the CEO's recommendation in the NWT report to reduce the nomination period from 10 to 5 days.
Members are confident that if new technology can be used to ensure access to forms, such as fax machines and downloading from websites or the use of electronic mail, there should be no difficulty in getting forms into every community.
If the forms are clear and straightforward, there should be no difficulty in people being able to submit a completed form. Although pay periods generally span two weeks, if people know when the nomination period will begin, they will be able to obtain the funds required for the deposit.
Recommendation #22: That the nomination period be shortened from 10 to 5 days.
While the Standing Committee agrees that the election period could be shortened, particularly with the use of modern technology, a number of factors will still need to be considered.
The more certain the timing for an election, the better prepared the election administration and the candidates will be, knowing that the writ will be dropped on a certain date.
This will be important because there are a number of steps that must occur in an election period (such as hiring local staff, setting up local offices, nominations, revisions of lists, mail-in ballot processes and others), and they will have to occur more quickly if we shorten the election period.
It is important to note that in the NWT, elections occurred four years from the date of the return of the writs for the previous general election.
However, the Nunavut Act changed this and now elections in Nunavut are not pre-determined to occur on a specific date.
s. 17.
No Assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date of the return of the writs for the general election, but the Commissioner may at any time, after consultation with the Executive Council, dissolve the Assembly.
Therefore, the government will have to consider how best to balance the benefits of advance notice and certainty, with its ability to decide when will be the best time to hold an election.
Recommendation #23: That the Government seek advice from Elections Nunavut to determine what advance notice will be required for the calling of an election to ensure proper administration of an election or by-election within the 35-day time period.
(v) Voting Eligibility - Age and Residency
There were two issues raised to the Standing Committee: age of voting and residency requirements.
Should the voting age be dropped to 16?
In exploring the possibilities of working together with other jurisdictions and harmonizing some of the election rules, it was observed that the voting age for NTI and the Regional Inuit Organizations is 16 years old, whereas territorial, municipal and federal elections all require a person to be 18 years old before they can vote.
The Standing Committee was advised by the President of NTI that this age was adopted many years ago on the advice of Elders, as it is a traditional age of maturity, and it was felt that 16-year-olds should be able to vote on land claim matters affecting their future.
Many people had strong opinions on this question during the community consultation meetings.
Some people felt that 16-year-olds should be able to vote, since many of the government decisions impact their lives and “young people should have some say in who is making these decisions”.
This included a wide range of people, including the high school students who met with us in Clyde River and Chesterfield Inlet, as well as teachers, parents and Elders.
They stated that 16-year-olds are dealing with many serious matters in their lives such as suicide, education and family issues.
They also said that “young people are very much more educated these days” and “more familiar with new technology and southern ways.”
At the same time, they felt that allowing people to vote at the age of 16 was more consistent with traditional Inuit ways, which recognized responsibility at a younger age and gave young people the opportunity to try doing new things, as a way of learning.
They felt that the high school curriculum could be developed to encourage voter education for young people.
Other people felt equally strongly that the age should not be dropped to 16.
This also included a wide range of people, including teachers, parents and Elders.
Some parents felt that 16-year-olds should focus on their education.
They were concerned that if 16-year-olds could vote, they could also run as candidates and this may take their attention away from their education.
There were also concerns raised that 16-year-olds are not mature enough today and that it would be better to wait.
One person suggested that as long as the Child Tax Credit is being received for the young person, they are too young to vote.
Some people were also concerned that parents or others could manipulate young people into voting certain ways, which is more difficult to do at the age of 18.
There were people who spoke for and against this issue in every community meeting, but in no location did the Standing Committee ask for a show of hands to see how the public felt about this matter.
The Standing Committee is itself divided as to whether the age of voting should be dropped to 16 years for territorial elections, or left at 18 years old.
Recommendation #24: That should the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut wish to further consider dropping the age of voting to 16, a more direct manner of determining the opinions of the people of Nunavut, such as a plebiscite or formal opinion poll, should be conducted on this question.
A number of people raised concerns about the residency requirements.
The current requirement to vote in a Nunavut election is one-year residency in Nunavut.
However, to vote in a municipal election, a person must have been resident in that specific community for 12 months.
A number of people complained that they were not permitted to vote in the territorial election because they had moved to another community, even though they had lived all their lives in Nunavut.
These people didn't think this was fair, and neither did the Standing Committee.
However, after reviewing the matter, the Standing Committee is not of the opinion that residency requirements is the problem.
Rather, it may be that election officials applied the wrong law due to lack of training or understanding of the Elections Act; or the voters’ lists themselves are too rigid and there needs to be more ability to "transfer" your name from one list to another; or more effort needs to be made to ensure students can vote in their home community through the use of mail-in ballots or other special voting opportunities.
The Standing Committee agrees with a number of presenters that before a person votes in a Nunavut election, they should have some appreciation of the issues affecting Nunavummiut and the candidates in their electoral district and that one year in Nunavut is an appropriate length of time.
The Standing Committee recognizes that for some people, moving during the election period may make it very difficult to determine where they should vote.
They may feel more comfortable voting in their former community, where they are more familiar with the candidates and the issues, than in their new community, where they do not have that same familiarity.
To the extent that people are on the voters’ list in their former community, the Standing Committee supports their right to vote in that community, either through the use of a mail-in ballot or voting in the office of the Returning Officer before they leave the community.
However, on election day, they should be able to vote in their new community and the electoral system should ensure that they are able to do so, in a relatively straight forward manner.
Recommendation #25: That eligibility to vote in Nunavut continue to require one year of residency in Nunavut in the new Elections Act and that Nunavut residents who move to a new community at any time in the year prior to an election should be able to vote in that community.
Recommendation #26: That students who are resident in another community for the purpose of continuing their education should be able to claim a temporary absence and continue to be on the voters’ list in their home community, if they wish.
(vi) Special Voting Opportunities and Voting in Advance of Election Day
A number of concerns were raised by the public that reinforced the Standing Committee's desire to build more flexibility in the electoral process to meet the needs of those voters in Nunavut who are unable to go to the polls on election day for various reasons.
Given that the Returning Officers for each electoral district are appointed at the beginning of the election period, the Standing Committee feels that more voting opportunities should be afforded to electors prior to election day.
Advance Polls
The present Elections Act provides that advance polls are held in communities with more than 500 persons.
Concerns were raised that people in communities with less than 500 persons were not able to vote in advance polls.
Those electoral districts with more than one community felt this most acutely, since if one lived in the smaller community and an advance poll was taking place in the larger community, one could only vote at the advance poll if one paid for an airfare to come to the larger community.
The Standing Committee feels that all voters should be given similar opportunities to vote in advance of election day.
However, the Standing Committee also recognizes that advance polls in smaller communities are often done by flying in election officials and in order to efficiently accommodate flight schedules, it may be desirable to reduce the hours of the polls on the advance polling day.
A new opportunity provided to voters this past election was the right to vote in the office of the Returning Officer in advance of election day. Although not used much, it seems that this was well received by voters and election officials.
Since Returning Officers have offices and have set hours of operation, the Standing Committee feels that it should be possible for voters to use this voting opportunity more.
Therefore, it may be unnecessary to hold advance polls in communities where the office of the Returning Officer is located.
Recommendation #27: That the practice of allowing voters to vote in the office of the Returning Officer during the 14-day period in advance of election day be continued.
Recommendation #28: That if advance polls are to be held, they be held in those communities that do not have an office of the Returning Officer.
Recommendation #29: That the hours of operation for advance polls be reduced to a minimum of three hours, as determined by the Returning Officer in consultation with the CEO.
Proxy Voting
The Standing Committee was advised that the proxy voting procedures in the Elections Act were changed prior to the last election to address concerns about potential abuse.
Nevertheless, the Chief Electoral Officer has recommended that proxy voting be abolished in our Act, as he feels that there are other voting opportunities that address the needs of those voters who have used them in the past.
While the Standing Committee supports an election procedure in which each voter exercises his or her vote personally, there may still be extreme circumstances relating to weather or travel that will still make it important for voters to exercise their vote by proxy.
Recommendation #30: That the CEO review the proxy voting requirements and examine ways in which the proxy voting requests could be dealt with more directly by elections officials, rather than by candidates or candidate’s workers, and that proxy voting be limited to extreme circumstances.
Mail-in Ballots
Mail-in ballots were a new procedure that was provided to voters in the first Nunavut election.
The procedure requires voters to fill in an application form for the mail-in ballot.
Once received by the elections office, the person's name is struck off the voters' list for election day and they are sent a package with a ballot.
The package contains several envelopes that are sent back to the elections office, one of which confirms that they are the voter and the other contains their confidential ballot.
The idea seems to address the needs of many voters who know that they will not be in their community on election day, such as students.
However, the system is far too rigid, insofar as voters had to apply for the mail-in ballots long before election day and the time-lines were too tight for mail in the north.
For example, by the time some students received information on their right to vote in this manner, it was too late to apply for the mail-in ballot.
The Standing Committee is confident that through the use of new technology, it should be possible to access the forms to request a mail-in ballot through the Internet or by fax and that no deadlines should be put on the timing for making this request.