Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 1846
View Élaine Michaud Profile
NDP (QC)
You told us about a project that is more focused on the problem of domestic violence.
Do you have any projects or programs that are more focused on youth at risk of becoming involved with gangs or criminal activities?
Matthew Torigian
View Matthew Torigian Profile
Matthew Torigian
2013-06-18 9:23
Yes, we have partnered with our local crime prevention council. It's a crime prevention council that is extremely successful; it is really a table that has been set with a number of community stakeholders and representatives from a cross-section of disciplines right throughout our entire community.
As a result of the work they've done, and in partnering with us, what they're trying to do is generate programming where they can get out in front of, and identify, at-risk youth. Perhaps somebody who has a sibling who's been involved in a gang...get to them and create opportunities to direct them in a different direction. It's called inREACH, and it's an anti-gang program that's going on in Waterloo right now.
But to speak to Professor Murphy's earlier point, the evaluation of these programs is difficult. Even with this particular program, inREACH, there are differing views as to whether it's successful. What we really need is some very sound academically based research or outcomes evaluation that would inform us as to whether or not these in fact work.
What we're doing in Waterloo as well is we've partnered with a number of other agencies and police services in putting into place a Saskatchewan HUB model. It's a focus on health, because we know the social determinants of health overlap with the determinants of crime, and we're seeing an overlap there. We're focusing in on health, and again our goal is to get upstream and intervene upstream with a number of people before they come into contact with us, because we know that if they're coming into contact with us, they're coming into contact with emergency wards and other social services.
Sara Mayo
View Sara Mayo Profile
Sara Mayo
2013-06-11 11:26
No problem. I will slow down.
I'll just say that again. I'm looking at the educational profile of older workers, workers aged 65 to 74. The 2006 census data indicates that among older workers, the largest group is those with no high school education. The second-largest group is those with university education. Workers with less education are more likely to be low income and working due to economic hardship, who would prefer to retire if they had enough pension and income support. Workers with more education are more likely to report high job satisfaction and have higher incomes, which means they're more likely to be continuing working because they want to. Public policies should encourage the second circumstance; that is to say, it's preferable to have workers who are not in financial hardship but prefer to keep working into their 60s and 70s.
I just spoke about older workers, but if we look at all older adults, including those who are retired, we see another important trend. Among each educational category, older adults with university education are most likely to be working. So 25% of university-educated older adults are employed versus only 9% of older adults with no high school education—this is in Hamilton; the data in Canada is very similar.
If we want to increase workforce participation among older adults, we must first begin by increasing post-secondary access and completion for young people. This is key to ensuring the next generation will work for a longer period.
To ensure that today's youth extend their working lives into their 70s instead of retiring at 65, the federal government should consider, as a minimum, things such as adopting recommendations of the Assembly of First Nations with regard to increased funding for on-reserve schools and post-secondary access, and increasing funding for the Canada student loans program. I'm sure you've had other witnesses speak about other ways that the federal government can increase access and completion of post-secondary education.
The Canada job grant does not look that promising for older workers. We've heard a lot of concerns here in Hamilton that older workers are less likely to benefit from what was announced in the last budget. The required matching contribution from employers will favour younger workers because employers are less likely to invest their own training dollars in an older worker.
The second thing I want to speak about is the challenges faced by older workers in the labour market. The SPRC has many contacts with laid-off and unemployed older workers through research interviews we've done and poverty elimination committees that we are part of. Their experience is that older workers face significant age discrimination from employers. Secondly, the physical labour performed by many workers in Hamilton for decades has taken an enormous toll on their bodies and their health. Reintegrating these workers into labour markets would require not only retraining but also significant accommodation of workers' disabilities, which few employers are willing to do.
Lastly, I will speak about generational equity. We published a report recently about median employment incomes in Hamilton of the overall population and young workers. In 1976, young workers aged 20 to 24 used to earn about 68% of the median employment income in Hamilton. In 2010, young workers were only earning about 44% of the median employment earnings of the population.
Youth income has been declining for decades due to factors such as fewer hours of work, lower wages, longer time unemployed between contracts, and even the rise of unpaid internships. There's not enough data on that. We hope that Stats Canada will have the resources to look at that issue. Anecdotally we're worried that is a big problem.
This big crisis in generational equity is being ignored. Lower income for youth is leading young people to live longer with their parents, to delay starting a family, or to postpone buying a home. These all have very negative impacts on the economy, obviously. Precarious employment has negative effects on workers' physical and mental health, which increases costs to the health care system.
Unless policy changes are made to reverse these trends, low-income and precarious work means today's young workers will have very little of their own savings and be less likely to accumulate full CPP benefits. This means they will be more likely to need OAS and GIS when they retire. Delaying the age—
Norman Hope
View Norman Hope Profile
Norman Hope
2013-06-06 9:32
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Minister, members of Parliament, support staff, and other parliamentarians, thank you for this opportunity to speak to you at committee. I'd like to thank you all for taking the time to study Bill C-62, the Yale First Nation treaty bill. It's been 17 years in the making, a long and expensive negotiation with Canada and British Columbia through the B.C. Treaty Commission process.
We have dealt with many difficult issues over the negotiation, but with good faith and honest negotiations. At no time did any one party attempt to make a slick deal of any sort. There was respect for negotiators around the table.
At one time we called our treaty a fish treaty because we depend so much on the fishery resource. We always have. It's a big part of our life. But we found that we can't rely totally on the fish anymore. Times are changing. We worked on this treaty with the young people in mind. Therefore, I call it “the treaty for the youth”. They are the ones who will have to implement this over the next number of years, should it be approved, and they will have to live with it. We have many very capable young people growing up, coming to work in our office and other places in the community. They're very capable. I'm confident that when the time comes to implement this treaty and carry on from there, they will be able to do it.
Treaties are about land, power, and money. Certainly the land is the key issue here. We have to have water with land. We hope to harness some of that water for hydro power in the future. Other resources on the land are the timber resource, gold and other precious metals, gravel, and of course wildlife, and fish in the Fraser River. These are very important to us and the future of our people.
As for the power part of this treaty, we are working towards building our self-government. We have a constitution that has been ratified by the people of Yale First Nation. The young people I talked about will have an opportunity to build this government from the ground up. They'll have a constitution that they actually took part in to follow on all the issues that we had to deal with.
The Yale First Nation government will not have a lot of duties, but they are important to us. The government will govern our land. They will govern the fishery resource, along with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We will decide who can fish and where they can fish within the Yale area. I'm talking about the Yale people, nobody else. We can't suggest for a minute that we will tell anybody where they can fish, only the Yale people.
Of course we'll work with the federal government, DFO, the fisheries. The government will create a membership act on who the Yale people will be, or are. The Indian Act will disappear. I will certainly be relieved. After 34 years of being chief I found that doing business through the Department of Indian Affairs is quite slow and restricted. Self-government is great. I think it's good for us. We'll finally be able to look after ourselves.
As for the money, there's not a lot of money involved in this treaty. As I said, it's been a long, expensive negotiation and we do have a large loan to repay, but I'm looking forward to the economic development part of the settlement.
We would really like to provide some jobs in the outlying area, not only for the Yale First Nation people, but for our neighbours, the non-first nation people. We look forward to joint venturing with the businesses in the communities in the outlying area. Certainly, the implementation dollars will help us get set up to work with our new responsibilities. The fiscal finance agreement will be outside the treaty.
I would like to say a few things about our neighbours in the towns of Yale and Hope, and the outlying area, the Fraser Valley Regional District. We've met many times with these groups, and they have supported the Yale treaty since day one. We have a very close relationship with the regional district, area B, and the mayor of Hope, and the small community of Yale. We work closely with them. We grew up with them, and we expect good things in the future working side by side with them.
As for the first nation neighbours, we've spent a fair amount of time dealing with them. To the north of us are the Spuzzum and Nlaka'pamux nations. We have a very close relationship with them. They're very much like us. The formation of the land is very similar. They're in the Fraser Canyon. We'll continue to get along with them. We've always had an understanding of a boundary between Yale and Spuzzum, which we call Five Mile Creek. That's always been understood. We saw no need to put it in writing, and we haven't, at least to this date. It's clearly understood that there's a boundary between Yale First Nation and the Spuzzum Indian band. They are not in the treaty process.
To the west of us, up towards Harrison Lake, we have the In-SHUCK-ch people, our neighbours. We have trails up and over the hills that come out at Harrison Lake. We've met with the In-SHUCK-ch people many times, and we've determined that we do not have overlap concerns with any of the many Indian bands of the In-SHUCK-ch.
We've also met with the Chehalis, who are up in that same direction. The Chehalis are a separate nation. They're not Stó:lo people. They're a unique group of people. We've met with them and we have agreed that yes, we do have some shared territory, but they have said they do not want to hold up the process while we make up some sort of an agreement. We will at some point make an agreement in writing on how we will share the territory between Yale and Chehalis. As the crow flies, it's not really that far.
At the moment, with the Chehalis group, we have a handshake type of agreement. We've agreed that the Chehalis people may come up and camp on our land and fish in the Fraser River. In return, they have agreed that the Yale people can go over towards Chehalis and hunt and gather plants and pick blueberries. That is a really good historical agreement, at this point a handshake, but we will put it in writing. This is the type of arrangement we would like to do with all our neighbours.
We have the Spuzzum to the north. We have the In-SHUCK-ch and the Chehalis to the west. To the south of us are the Stó:lo people.
The closest Stó:lo Indian band would be the Union Bar Indian band. It is a very small community. They have a river frontage like we do. They have found that they're having the same problems that the Yale are having. Many neighbours are encroaching on their land and fishing in the Fraser River. They have some really good fishing places. They have some good land to camp on. They have streams to get water from. It's a nice territory, but they have the same problems we have.
I have not been able to talk to Chief Andy Alex of the Union Bar Indian band at length about this issue, although he said he'll talk, and these are his words, “at the appropriate time”. That has yet to happen, but I look forward to the day.
As for the other Stó:lo Indian bands, over the last 17 years we've attempted to meet with them. In many cases we were successful in getting a meeting, but they would not deal with the issue at hand. They wanted to negotiate with me and the Yale First Nation for our territory. Well, our territory wasn't on the table. What I was agreeable to do was to work out some sort of an arrangement for the Stó:lo people to come up and camp on our land and fish in the Fraser River. That's what I'd like to have discussed, but they would not deal with that. They wanted to negotiate some of the Yale land away from us. That certainly was not on the table.
We went through that for many years. As we concluded the negotiation of the treaty, the federal government arranged for a mediator, Vince Ready. He's a very well-known mediator. We agreed to this. For a year we attended mediation sessions to make an arrangement so that the Stó:lo people could come on our land, camp and fish, and enjoy the territory, but they had other ideas. They wanted to add on to the Yale treaty some provisions for the Stó:lo to come on our land. That was not on the table either. We would never.... It's impossible. It doesn't make sense. They wanted to add some Stó:lo clauses in the Yale treaty. That wasn't agreeable to Yale.
We found that the mediation was going nowhere. We were not agreeing on anything that would help us get along in the future. Myself, I came to the conclusion that I should be talking to the grassroots people. They're the ones on the ground. They're the ones who would be camping on our land and fishing in the river, not the grand chiefs. I don't believe the grand chiefs could have done an agreement with Yale. How could they bind 10,000 people to an agreement? I think it would be difficult. Anyway, it didn't go anywhere. The mediations stopped.
We hope to get on with concluding this treaty.
I am looking forward to questions regarding the Stó:lo in the next part.
I would like our negotiator Rob Reiter to say a couple of words about the treaty.
Fabian Manning
View Fabian Manning Profile
Hon. Fabian Manning
2013-05-30 12:06
Thank you, Chair.
I know I speak for Senator Patterson as well in saying that it is an honour to be here today.
I had the privilege at one time in another life to sit in the chair you're in as chair of this committee in the House of Commons. I just want to let you know that I'm looking forward to not coming back.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Fabian Manning: But we're delighted to be here today.
Honourable members of the committee, Chair, thank you for the invitation to appear before your committee today.
My name is Fabian Manning, and I am a senator from Newfoundland and Labrador. I currently chair the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I am here today to speak about the main findings and recommendations emerging from two reports that the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans tabled on Arctic fisheries issues.
One report, tabled in 2009, is entitled, “Nunavut Marine Fisheries: Quotas and Harbours”. The other report was tabled in May 2010 and is entitled, “The Management of Fisheries and Oceans in Canada's Western Arctic”.
I am accompanied today by my colleague, Senator Dennis Glen Patterson. At the time the 2009 report was completed, I was a member of the committee. When the 2010 report was completed, Senator Patterson was co-chair of the committee, while I was still a member.
I understand that former senator William Rompkey was to appear before you today along with us but is unable to be here. Mr. Rompkey was chair of the Senate committee when these studies were completed. I would definitely suggest that he is a man with a wealth of knowledge in this industry. He chaired the committee in the Senate for many years. I would suggest that if you get the opportunity you invite him again to appear before you.
Senator Patterson and I hope that our collective memory will serve you well as we answer questions you may ask us concerning these reports.
Before going into some detail on each report, I would like to briefly remind committee members of some of the characteristics, challenges, and opportunities that are unique to the Arctic.
The Arctic, as you know, covers a vast region with many small communities living sparsely and remotely. Aboriginal peoples have traditionally occupied the region. They comprise 80% of the population in some communities. Aboriginal peoples want to preserve a way of life that is based on their traditions, culture, and their values. They want to partner in priority-setting, policy-making, and decision-making in relation to economic development and the preservation of the environment.
Climate change is having a disproportionate impact on the Arctic. The ice cover is reportedly becoming thinner, covering less of the circumpolar Arctic, and receding more quickly than previously believed possible. This has significant implications for the people and for the biodiversity of the Arctic. In addition, it has rendered parts of the region more accessible to natural resource development and to marine navigation, as in the case of the Northwest Passage.
Communities living in the Arctic face significant challenges in the promotion of economic and social development; however, the region offers great potential to develop commercial fisheries. Commercial fisheries are particularly important to residents of small communities in which income-earning opportunities are limited. Two important aspects to consider in the expansion of commercial fisheries in the Arctic are their isolation and the high cost of transporting products to southern markets.
Against this background, the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans initiated and concluded its study on Arctic fisheries. The overarching thrust of the recommendations contained in the two reports is that the expansion of sustainable commercial fisheries in the Arctic should be pursued to take advantage of emerging opportunities and to generate much-needed economic and social benefits, while at the same time be used as a means to demonstrate Canada's exercise of its sovereignty and jurisdiction.
The 2009 report on the Nunavut fisheries is based on public hearings held here in Ottawa, and in both Iqaluit and Pangnirtung, in Nunavut. It contains eight recommendations.
Some of these recommendations were acted upon, such as the building of a small craft harbour in Pangnirtung to foster the expansion of small boat community-based fishing in Nunavut.
The federal government also supports the recommendation that calls on Fisheries and Oceans Canada to continue to assign 100% of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization's division 0A turbot allocation to Nunavut until Nunavut has achieved a comparable level of access to adjacent marine resources.
Other recommendations include that DFO put in place a policy giving Nunavut stakeholders the right of first refusal to purchase, at a competitive rate, all fishery quotas in Nunavut's adjacent waters that are transferred or sold; and that DFO increase funding for exploratory research in Nunavut’s adjacent waters in order to gain knowledge of the stock of various species and to inform decision-making in the development of commercial fisheries.
Finally, the last recommendation underlines the need to monitor the effects that increased marine activity, particularly due to cruise ships visiting the area, could have on individual marine species and ecosystems. The report recommends an assessment of the impact of all vessel activity on whales and the development of protective management measures, such as vessel exclusion zones at certain times of the year.
The 2010 report on the western Arctic is based on public hearings held here in Ottawa, and in Yellowknife and Inuvik in the Northwest Territories. It makes 14 recommendations for sustainably developing both coastal and freshwater fisheries to the benefit of both the western Arctic region and Canada as a whole. As you may already know, some of these recommendations have been acted upon. One of them led to the creation in August 2010 of the Tarium Niryutait marine protected areas, an initiative to conserve and protect the biological resources in the Beaufort Sea and support the viability of a healthy population of beluga whales.
Another one relates to the moratorium on commercial fishing in the Beaufort Sea, which was implemented in 2011.
Some other recommendations include the establishment of an intergovernmental DFO-Nunavut working group to develop a strategy to expand the Arctic char fisheries in the territory. Commercial fishing for Arctic char represents an opportunity for economic growth and social development.
A comprehensive strategy to revitalize the commercial fishery on Great Slave Lake was another recommendation. The recommendation calls on DFO to collaborate with fishery stakeholders and territorial bodies to formulate and fund the strategy. A key element would be facilitating the entry of young aboriginal fishers to the industry.
Another recommendation calls on the federal government to provide the Fresh Fish Marketing Corporation, FFMC, with adequate assistance to upgrade equipment and modernize processing plant operations. The FFMC is the single-desk seller for freshwater commercial fish harvested in most of western Canada, and it provides access to domestic and international markets for small and isolated fishing communities.
The committee also recommended that commercial fisheries and economic development in the Arctic be underpinned by thorough research on the ecosystem to develop baseline data. Research should also be undertaken to determine the species of fish that have the potential for commercial development.
Finally, some recommendations address Canada-U.S. bilateral issues. One relates to the bycatch of Yukon River chinook salmon by U.S. pollock fishermen. Another one recommends the development of a complementary Canada-U.S. approach to ecosystem-based management in the Beaufort Sea.
To conclude my opening remarks, I would like to stress the Senate committee’s long interest in issues facing the Arctic. In 2010 we also tabled “Rising to the Arctic Challenge: Report on the Canadian Coast Guard”. This report describes the impact of increased international shipping traffic in the Northwest Passage and concludes that a stronger coast guard is needed to protect Canadian interests, and that more thought must be given to its future role in projecting Canada’s sovereignty in the region. Among other things, the committee recommended acquiring new heavy icebreakers capable of operating year-round in the Arctic Archipelago and on the extended continental shelf. It called on the coast guard to recruit Inuit whenever possible.
My colleague, Senator Patterson, has a few remarks to make, and then we'll be pleased to answer any of your questions.
Thank you.
View Mike Allen Profile
CPC (NB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, folks, for being here today. We really appreciate it.
I want to ask a few questions with respect to coming in at a high level with respect to the types of fisheries that are in the Yukon. You commented, in your responses to Mr. Sopuck, that you are talking about a $23-million-a-year industry on the recreational side, for direct and indirect value. Also, your report talks about a decline in the number of non-resident anglers, as well as about participation by youth.
Can you tell me what your assessment is of the impact that is going to have upon that perhaps $23 million, going forward? What are some of the strategies you're undertaking to reverse that trend?
Nathan Millar
View Nathan Millar Profile
Nathan Millar
2013-05-28 11:35
Thanks. That's a good question. Certainly something that came out very strongly in our report was that when we looked at trends in participation and recreational fishing in Yukon, we did begin to see a slight decline in some categories. Overall, I'd categorize it as relatively stable right now, but the indicators are there such that we believe in the next 10 to 20 years, we're going to have a reduction in the number of people who participate in the recreational fishery.
I'm not an economist and I can't speak definitively to those numbers, but my biologist assessment is that we're going to see a reduction in expenditures that will be concomitant with the reduction in angler activity, which is concerning. Also, from a fisheries and management perspective, there's a big concern about reduction in angler participation because of some of the non-economic values that those provide. So what I'm talking about here are people who are out on the land who are engaging with fishing and with those species tend to have a lot of interest in maintaining those populations and in maintaining healthy ecosystems. When you start to see fewer people engaging in that activity, I personally get worried that you're not going to have as much advocacy for those important resources as we did in the past. That's really concerning for me as a fisheries manager.
You know what? I talked to colleagues across the country and these are trends that everyone is seeing. This is not a Yukon phenomenon. This is a national, maybe a worldwide phenomenon, where there's less uptake in angling by youth. The average age of an angler is increasing and increasing at quite a rapid rate in Yukon.
Dealing with this is a lot of programming, a lot of education, a lot of trying to encourage youth to get out and participate in angling. I think we're just scratching the surface now in terms of what those programs will be. But as I say, it's not necessarily just a Yukon phenomenon. I think every jurisdiction across the country is dealing with this same issue.
View Patricia Davidson Profile
CPC (ON)
I was interested in what you were saying about the decline in the number of non-resident anglers and the lack of participation by youth. I know you've talked a little bit about that, but you've also talked about the 23 stocked lakes and the fry releases. I think your comment when you talked about the fry releases was that it was a community event and many youth took part in that. Is that part of your strategy to reverse the trend of lower participation by youth, or is that something that's been ongoing for a long time?
Nathan Millar
View Nathan Millar Profile
Nathan Millar
2013-05-28 12:15
I like to take credit for it, as it's part of a very directed strategy, but I think the truth is that it's something we try to do as a general practice. We try to involve the community and involve youth. It's something that young people in particular are really passionate about. It's been ongoing for quite a long time.
Just to talk about that trend, what we've seen is a decline in non-resident anglers, but it's been very gradual. I just want to highlight that. We haven't seen a precipitous decline. We're worried about the future because of the trends we've seen in regard to the average age of anglers, but we haven't started to see the effects of that.
It has been a really good tool for us to forecast what we expect to see. I think that having a component of education and involvement in all the programs we do is going to become increasingly important. More programs in the future that are focused specifically on youth, on getting youths out there angling and on teaching them how to angle, will be increasingly important as well.
Dan Lindsey
View Dan Lindsey Profile
Dan Lindsey
2013-05-28 12:16
We've certainly added to that such things as a family fishing weekend, where basically there's no need for a fishing licence per se. You have conservation officers or fisheries officers who come out and actually help kids fish. That has been very popular. It's actually brought together some of the enforcement and monitoring folks in a bit more positive sense.
There's been a lot of really good take-up throughout the Yukon on those events, where you get people out and they have an officer or a fisheries biologist come along with them and show them how to fish. There are a lot of programs that are moving towards that. We see programs in the south, as well as the U.S. and Alaska, that try to keep that engagement going, and we're trying to pick up on some of that as well.
View Alexandrine Latendresse Profile
NDP (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Mayrand, thank you for your remarks. I would also like to thank your colleagues for being here today. We are pleased to be able to ask you questions and explore this issue a little further. Indeed, we believe it is extremely important.
In your reports and recommendations, you mentioned some pilot projects you wanted to implement to increase youth engagement in the electoral process. Today, you mentioned once again the possibility of setting up polling stations on university campuses and allowing more youth to work as electoral officials during the campaign and on election day. You know, and I believe the committee also knows, how important youth engagement is for me. It is also very important for the NDP.
We would very much like to collaborate as much as possible with Elections Canada in the context of such initiatives. For this reason, I am advising the committee that I am tabling the following notice of motion:That this committee:a) recognize that reports of the Chief Electoral Officer submitted to Parliament from 2010 onward demonstrate that, if Parliament does not modernize our electoral system in order to engage young Canadians, lower and lower percentages of eligible voters will turn out to vote in future federal elections; and
That this Committee conduct a comprehensive study before December 2013 on potential mechanisms to enhance youth electoral engagement in Canada, with the view to implement such changes before the next federal election, including: modernizing the online voter registration system; ensuring there are polling stations on university and college campuses across the country; recruiting and training more youth to act as elections officers; raising awareness about how and where to vote, especially among mobile college and university students; considering an electronic voting system; considering automatic registration; and removing barriers to pre-registering young people at age 16 as prospective voters, in advance of eligibility to vote at age 18.
Do you think the cuts to Elections Canada's budget will affect your recommendations and pilot projects?
Marc Mayrand
View Marc Mayrand Profile
Marc Mayrand
2013-05-28 12:07
In our business plan for the current fiscal year and our vision for 2015, I talk about reducing barriers in order to make voting more accessible, for youth and young aboriginals among others. This is a priority for Elections Canada. We need to allocate the necessary resources to ensure we attain this objective for 2015.
View Alexandrine Latendresse Profile
NDP (QC)
Very well.
I would like to hear more about electronic registration. Can you tell me what this will change for the younger population?
Marc Mayrand
View Marc Mayrand Profile
Marc Mayrand
2013-05-28 12:09
We see that the youth registration rate is approximately 72% whereas the national average is 92%. There is therefore a considerable shortfall in that regard, for all kinds of reasons. The current system requires the voters' consent before they can be registered. We know that in British Columbia and in other provinces, if voters do not express their desire to not be registered, they are registered automatically.
Moreover, motor vehicle registration offices and sometimes Revenue Canada send us information on young voters. Nonetheless, in order to register them we have to have their consent.
We write to these young people. Every year, 300,000 letters are sent to them from our offices. Unfortunately, the response rate is minimal. They would probably answer email more than correspondence on paper. We see that the lower the registration rate, the more difficult it is during an election campaign for them to know how and where to vote.
Our strategy therefore is to improve the registration rate, including that of young people and young aboriginals, with the hope that this will encourage them to participate more in the process. In that way, it will be easier for them to exercise their right to vote.
View Nycole Turmel Profile
NDP (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Mayrand, I would like to come back to my colleague's question about 18-year-old youth and the 300,000 envelopes that you send them. In order to assist you in this process, do you have any recommendations or suggestions that would allow for communication with young people before they reach the age of 18?
Results: 1 - 15 of 1846 | Page: 1 of 124

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data