Placemat: Policy Considerations by Ballot Option – CEO Appearance on the study on Indigenous languages on ballots before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

• A clear threshold would be needed for an IL to be used in an electoral district (ED).
• When multiple ILs meet the threshold, clear guidelines regarding the number of ILs to be used and method of selection should be defined.

• In the absence of legislation, the threshold would be developed by EC in consultation with the relevant Indigenous communities.

• When using languages that do not use the Latin alphabet, ordering rules would need to be established to list the candidates' names on the ballot. (The Canada Elections Act (CEA) currently provides that ballots must list candidate names alphabetically, i.e. by order of the Latin alphabet).

• The order of the languages in which candidates write their name on the declaration of candidacy would be the order in which the languages would appear on the ballot.
• Depending on which languages are used, ordering rules would need to be established to list the candidates on the ballot.

• Ordering rules would need to be established for the appearance of names in IL on the Indigenous ballot (e.g. apply the alphabetical order using either Latin characters or IL characters).

• The order of candidate names on the facsimile would match that on the ballot to allow voters to cross-reference.

• Questions to be answered:
  1. Who is responsible for providing the transliteration or translation?
  2. If provided by the candidate/party, what would the deadline be (e.g. close of nominations)?
  3. Would all party names also need to be translated into both French and English?

• Candidates/parties to supply transliterations and translations on voluntary basis. How is the coordination between candidate and party achieved?

• Questions to be answered:
  1. Who is responsible for providing the transliteration or translation?
  2. If provided by the candidate/party, what would the deadline be (e.g. close of nominations)?

• EC would be accountable for the transliteration and translation of the candidates/parties' names on the facsimile.

• CEA rules require proof of identification of a candidate's name. Consideration should be given to the use of Indigenous names that differ from those on identification documents. Passport Canada now allows traditional Indigenous names but requires supporting ID. Would this be an appropriate approach for the names in ILs on ballots?

• Define how non-IL speakers (candidates/parties) validate how their name appears on the ballot if EC is responsible for transliteration and translation.

• Define how EC validates the names submitted by candidates/parties.

• Define how non-IL speakers (candidates/parties) validate how their name appears on the ballot if EC is responsible for transliteration and translation.

• Would candidates/parties validate how their name appears on the facsimile?

• The existing ballot production schedule would not allow for the addition of an IL on the ballot, so more time would be needed. Although the processes would need to be piloted to determine the time required, this could be achieved by making legislative changes in order to:
  • Extend the nomination period to begin before the writ; and/or
  • Extend the electoral calendar to end the nomination period earlier in order to lengthen the time between the end of nominations and the start of advance polls.
• The existing CEA requirement for a counterfoil with numbering and packaging in a booklet results in much time and effort in the production process (use of separate machines, fewer printers offering this service). The inclusion of an IL on the ballot may require a legislative change to remove the existing requirement to allow for a simpler and faster ballot printing process.

• Adding facsimile production, printing and shipping to the already tight election timeline would be a challenge for both election day and advance voting. However, problems in producing the facsimile, in particular at advance polls, would not compromise the validity of an election.

• Accessibility tools for visually impaired electors may not be compatible if the ballot is larger or the font is smaller (i.e. new braille templates, with pre-set sizing to ensure that enough space is left for all the languages, would be needed for each ED).
• Additional languages on the ballot may lead to confusion for some communities that are already facing voting barriers (such as people with low literacy levels and/or intellectual disabilities).
• Extensive testing of the ballots would be required to ensure that the new ballot is accessible.

• Distinguishable types of ballots would introduce a risk of breach of secrecy of the vote in certain polling divisions.

• The fact that some candidate names would be on the ballot in Indigenous and other languages means that Indigenous voters would not have a ballot fully in their language.
• This could also affect fairness for some candidates/parties or how a candidate/party is perceived based on the ballot.

• Amendments to the CEA required.

• No amendments to the CEA required.

There are some additional considerations that must be taken into account when contemplating adding ILs to the special ballot. While many of the considerations outlined above are relevant to the special ballot, the following will also need to be factored in:

• Indigenous names written on the ballot in syllabic, i.e. not using the Latin alphabet, may be difficult to read during the counting process;
• Distinguishable types of ballots could increase the risk of a breach of secrecy of the vote.