Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada made more than 106 promises during the last election. Many of these promises generated a lot of excitement amongst Canadians, and coverage in the media. Providing homes for Syrian refugees, kick-starting our economy, reducing climate change, and other such issues are things Canadians care deeply about.
One promise that hasn’t garnered the same level of public engagement is electoral reform. This is concerning. Changing our electoral system, as the Liberals have promised, would significantly change which political parties form government. It would affect which politicians are elected, how government is formed, and which promises and policies are enacted. Because of the important impact electoral reform will have on our democracy, Canadians should take note, learn about the issues and join the discussion.
But before deciding on one electoral system or another, we must ask ourselves what we want an electoral system to achieve. No system is perfect. There will be tradeoffs between each system. The key is learning about these tradeoffs, and deciding which ones we are willing to make.
Canadians have to decide if we want the system to be simple and easy to understand. Do we want it to create strong majority governments or coalitions that share power among different parties? How important is local Member of Parliament representation? Should political power be distributed proportionally according to percentage of voting support – if the Greens or another party receive 10 per cent of the vote, should they win 10 per cent of seats in Parliament? Should the system make it easier to elect more women and candidates from diverse backgrounds? What about a system that gives independent candidates a better chance of being elected?
For example, first past the post (our current system), gives us strong local representation. There is one MP per riding, and that MP is supposed to represent that riding specifically. FPP is not proportional, however. That is, winning 10 per cent of the vote does not guarantee that you win 10 per cent of the seats. And parties can form majority governments -– gaining more than 50 per cent of the power -– when they only win 39 per cent of the vote. Conversely, a proportional representation system would give us a “fair” translation of votes to seats – you win 10 per cent of the votes, you gain 10 per cent of the seats. But it would lose, or dilute, the local representation that FPP affords.
Similarly, a ranked ballot system – like alternative vote – might lead to parties with more inclusive platforms. Under alternative vote, parties need not only be the first choice for many voters, but also the second choice for a significant number. This means the platforms they run on might be more inclusive, in an attempt to appeal to a wider range of voters. It might also mean that parties end up running on watered-down platforms that, while offending no one, excite no one either.
Ultimately, each electoral system presents tradeoffs. In choosing a system, Canadians need to be mindful of what tradeoffs exist, and of which ones they’re willing to make.
The Liberals have promised to consult Canadians before reforming the system. Over the summer and fall, there will be opportunities to learn about and contribute your views and preference for one election system or another. A Parliamentary committee responsible for reviewing the issues and hearing from experts, and Canadians will prepare a report for Parliament to consider later in 2016.
North Shore Community Resource Society is hosting Democracy Café 2.0 to provide North Shore residents with a real opportunity to learn, share and participate in a free, interactive, non-partisan conversation about different options possible for our federal election system. Through this discussion, Canadians can learn about the impact electoral reform will have, and the tradeoffs involved with each system.
Communities across the country are holding similar consultations and discussions. We invite you to join the conversation and make your democratic contribution at Democracy Café 2.0.
Murray Mollard is executive director of North Shore Community Resource Society. Megan Dias is a graduate student at UBC’s department of political science and a lead facilitator at Democracy Café 2.0, Sept. 10 at West Vancouver Memorial Library, Sept. 17 at North Vancouver City Library and Sept. 22 at Capilano University. Visit nscr.bc.ca to reserve a seat.
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
