Why is our Elections Act so cumbersome and intricate, so complex and hard to be understood by the general public? I am very sorry that the Chief Electoral Officer did not bring in an act more simple in form. It could be contained in a dozen pages and the common people could readily understand it. The old act contains 245 pages. We 'have seen in this House eminent lawyers disagreeing on certain clauses of that act and if these legal gentlemen are at a loss to understand it how are we to expect the common people who are the ones most concerned, the voters, to have any clear knowledge of it?
the section. Rule 15 of schedule (a) to section 32 directs the revising officer to certify and commence the printing of his lists and to send statements of changes and additions to candidates on the twelfth day before polling day. The sittings of the
revising officer conclude on the fifteenth day before polling day, and as time presses at this stage and it is important that the printing of the lists should be completed as early as possible, there seems to be no reason why the statute should require an unnecessary waste of three days.
think that this section should stand until we have disposed of section 21? There must be fourteen days between nomination day and polling day, and if the list is to be presented to the candidate on nomination day the revising officer would have to complete his work more than twelve days before polling day.
of section 15, as of most of them. It puts the onus on the person appeal-
12 noon ing against the name to show that the particular voter has no right to vote. It has unfortunately been the practice in large cities to put on the lists all sorts and conditions of people, hundreds of whom do not live at all and never did live. How are you going to show that some fictitious name is fictitious? You cannot do it. You can put the burden on the man appealing but he cannot discharge that burden; there is no way of doing it. What would be the result? You would have thousands of names of people who were merely imaginary, all voting by telegraph, and no one could appeal and establish his claim against a single one of these fictitious people.