Focusing in on Canada’s democracy conversation

Well, it feels like it's been a long time since I've been home.

Well... not exactly home but "at home" in Canadian politics.

I've been focused for so long on following and explaining the American system that Canadian politics has become my pleasure reading. I've decided it's time to come home and get serious about what's going on here.

This week I thought it might be helpful to look at the national conversation on democracy (www.mydeomcracy.ca). I am sure that many of you are aware that the Canadian government is looking at the possibility of electoral reform and they are also committed to engaging more citizens in the conversation about democracy and representation.

Many have criticized the online survey for not getting to the heart of the question about electoral reform so I thought I would look at a few of the questions here and explain what the questions are getting at in the hope that, if you do participate, you will have a good sense of what assumptions are at the heart of the questions.

Our current electoral system, first-past-the-post or single member plurality, tends to produce majority governments. An outcome of the system is that the seat distribution in the House of Commons is disproportionate to the number of votes won in the overall popular vote. Here are the results of the 2015 federal election:

First-past-the-post supports the Westminster style of government that requires that the government of the day keeps the confidence of the House. You can see with the numbers above that the Liberals would not have had enough seats for a majority government if the seat distribution were proportional. The results get skewed because each constituency is not won by a majority but rather a plurality of votes. Our system of government is a trustee model which means that in Parliament MPs represent their party. MPs will vote along party lines. So Conservative MPs vote with the Conservative Party, Liberal MPs vote with the Liberal Party, etc.

This system allows the party with the majority to ensure that they can pass legislation in the House with 50 per cent plus one of the votes, which is a requirement for the government to stay in power. So, the point is that the current electoral system mostly (but not always) favours majority governments.

It is still possible for governments to run with a minority of the seats but they need other parties to vote with them. Normally, under a minority government legislation is developed through cooperation and compromise across party lines. Some argue that this kind of cooperation weakens legislation as the lead party (the governing party) may have to compromise their policies to get other parties to vote.

So here are a few questions from the survey that require an understanding of the system to understand the assumptions in the questions.

"Members of Parliament should always act in the interests of their constituents, even if it means going against their own party." This question requires you to know that in the current system MPs might have to choose the interests of the party over the interests of their constituents because MPs vote along party lines in the trustee system.

"It should always be clear which party is accountable for decisions made by government, even if this means that decisions are only made by one party." And "It is better for several parties to have to govern together than for one party to make all the decisions in government, even if it takes longer for government to get things done." These questions require that you know that majority governments can make decisions for the whole country despite the fact that they did not get a majority of the popular vote and that they did not have to consult across party lines. They are, however, accountable for the decision and cannot blame other parties.

"Ensuring that more individuals are elected from groups that are currently underrepresented in Parliament should be a top priority." This question assumes that the voter understands that the current system awards seats disproportionately and along party lines. This question is asking you if you think that seats should be awarded in a way that is more proportionate to the actual number of votes received for a particular party or are awarded more to underrepresented groups.

As with most surveys, participants are being asked the same question in a number of different ways. You should be able to identify that you are being asked on the one hand about first-past-the post and trustee politics versus on the other hand systems that favour types of proportional representation and a focus more on constituency or group interests. Each question requires that you unpack the assumptions, systems and processes that are being described.