The newly elected Liberal government of Justin Trudeau has promised that 2015 will be the last conducted on the first-past-the-post system that has been the hallmark of parliamentary governments based on the British system of governance for centuries. Recent history at the provincial level has proven that will be a challenging promise to deliver.
Although the first-past-the-post system is well-crafted to deliver strong governments, generally agreed by academics as favouring large well-organized centrist parties and incumbent governments, its claim to providing representative democracy is somewhat more tenuous. Rare are the majority governments delivered with more than 50 percent of the vote and often putting the near dictatorial powers of the supremacy of parliament into the hands of parties whose national vote barely stretches to one-third of the electorate. Mr. Trudeau’s own “landslide” majority win of 184 seats came with only 39.5 percent of the vote.
Although the Liberals have voiced a preference for the preferential ballot, where a voter ranks candidates according to their preference (the system now used by most federal parties, at least in part, to select their own leaders), they have also committed to extensive public consultation in deciding what the national electoral balloting system will be come the next election.
Although much of the national debate on electoral reform prior to the recent federal election focussed on forms of proportional voting, where the number of seats allocated to each party matches up with the number of votes each party receives during the general election, this form of balloting has little to recommend it to those used to regional representation, as instead of members being elected to represent ridings, they are generally chosen from lists presented by the parties themselves.
In a system where parties have arguably already garnered too much control over the political process and the role of an individual Member of Parliament has been eroded almost to irrelevance, proportional representation will strip away the last vestiges of local representation from the electorate.
Canada is a country cleft with countless cleavages and regional interests that has nonetheless managed, more often than not, to forge a national consensus in its governments where each region possesses some voice within the House of Commons and governments have ignored regional concerns at their peril. It is clear, however, that 2015 demands a system of government that will better reflect the national will at the ballot box.
Proportional elections also tend to fracture the political landscape, leading to less stable coalition governments and that presents the least attractive argument to many Canadians who have watched the machinations and contortions of European governments based on that model with trepidation.
It has been argued that the preferential ballot will be the death knell of the Conservative Party of Canada. While such an argument might well be true of a Harper government whose strategy was based on exploiting wedge politics, there is no reason to extend that argument to a new Conservative Party of Canada leader who may seek to build a national consensus that will offer a palatable alternative to the Liberals or the NDP in some future election.
The preferential ballot has been labelled by some as “the least objectionable candidate” system, the winner often being decided by the second, third, fourth or fifth choices of an elector (the actual number of choices depending on the number of candidates standing for election). It is not at all beyond the pale to imagine a Stansfield, a Deifenbaker or even a Joe Clark welding together a winning collection of interests to win the day and the same can be said for the NDP or any other party that steps up to the plate.
In fact, the preferential ballot will enable electors to both vote with their hearts, minds and passion while also voting strategically at the same time. By also maintaining the electoral district (riding) system of representation electors will be able to ensure that the specific issues and concerns of their region will have a voice in the House of Commons.
An added bonus will be the tacit dependence each party will have on attracting the second or third choices of a majority of the electorate. The result will doubtless be a less partisan, more respectful discourse and debate of issues, particularly in the heat of elections. Attack ads are anathema if you will need the support of other party supporters to win the day.
It can be surmised that a less acrimonious political culture will also assist in encouraging highly qualified and accomplished people to consider taking on public service. Today’s tendency towards nasty mudslinging contests hardly presents an attractive allure.
Whatever system is presented to the Canadian electorate in the end, it must be simple and easy to understand if it is to be accepted by the voters. The recent electoral reform debacle in British Columbia and Ontario’s own muddled (and some would suggest deliberately so by the dominant Ontario Liberals) attempt provide ample examples of how not to approach the issue.
The debate on electoral reform is likely to be a lively one. Predictions are that the Conservatives will tout the status quo, while the NDP and Greens are likely to promote the proportional vote.
Whichever method is selected, it is fervently hoped that the rise in voter turnout witnessed in the recent federal election continues to rise—for that will result in all Canadians being the winners.
