Among Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s many campaign promises was to do away with Canada’s current voting system, as he vowed that the 2015 election would be the last one ever to use the traditional first-past-the-post system.
The Prime Minister has said the government will bring together an all-party committee to review a wide variety of reforms, such as ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting and online voting.
That promise seems to have generated controversy of late, with people saying that the Liberals do not have a mandate to fundamentally alter the voting system.
It’s true, our current system works: it’s simple, easy to understand and easy to tabulate. But is it fair? The Liberals and Conservatives might be content to duke it out forever as the two major governing parties, but does it really serve Canadians as a whole to have one or the other command a majority, with only 40 per cent of the popular vote?
It’s clear voter turnout has largely declined over the past four decades, and it has not been unheard of for people to question why they would bother voting if their voice is not likely to be heard in a first past the post system. Under a proportional representation system, for instance, this could be addressed, say by having a Conservative MP represent the Atlantic provinces dominated by Liberals, or a Liberal MP giving voice to Liberal-minded constituents living in Western Canada.
Our current system has perennial losers, including the NDP and the Green Party, who may be able to command more of a voice in Parliament under a reformed system, and who may have new or fresh ideas to bring to the table.
The biggest challenge is in explaining a new system to voters, who will likely be resistant to change. Between 2005 and 2009, in three separate referendums—in Prince Edward Island, Ontario and British Columbia—electoral-reform proposals were defeated. But a referendum is still the proper process for electoral reform - proponents have to explain why they believe an alternative system is needed, and convince the people of this country that it is.
Interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose has said she had no judgments about the proposals, having not seen any yet, and put it most succinctly when she said, “But I do think when you are talking about the most fundamental way we govern ourselves, it’s not up to the House, it’s up to the people.”
