The other day I was asked about the federal Liberal promise to change the electoral system.
This is one of those issues which play well before or during an election but afterwards?
No. It should be quietly put in a drawer and left there to gather dust.
In June of last year, the National Post ran a story which stated: "Justin Trudeau wants this fall's national vote to be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post electoral system.
"And, if the Liberal leader becomes prime minister, it may also be the last election in which Canadians can choose not to vote, as well as the last in which the only way to vote is by marking an X on a paper ballot."
Since then, we have come to learn Trudeau was serious about this promise.
So much so that he is convening a special all-party committee to look into the matter. They are to engage in a broad consultation with all Canadians and to recommend a replacement for the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system within 18 months.
To his credit, Trudeau is not trying to impose his views. He favours some form of preferential balloting but is on the record as being very clear he is not trying to push his own agenda.
He has also not ruled out a national referendum on the issue - although how that vote would go would still need to be decided.
After all, if it is a simple majority, you could have Ontario and Quebec totally in favour and the rest of the country opposed but it would still pass. Or vice versa.
In any case, there seems to be a rush to change the system we have been using since Confederation.
On the one hand, the rush might seem reasonable since we have only four years until the next election. Overhauling the electoral system will take time. Implementing the new rules will take time.
A national referendum will take time. By the time the committee reports back to Parliament, there will be only a couple of years left to put everything in place.
But this is also a reason to maybe put the brakes on this idea.
Is it realistic to get all of the legwork done in the time available?
Would it not be more reasonable to poll the will of the House and recognize this is a long term, multi-year, multi-term project if it should be done at all?
And that is where the crux of the issue lies for me. Should we be changing the system? To what end and why?
The answer given is generally the voting public and young voters in particular don't feel their vote counts. A vote for the non-winning candidates is wasted.
Except that is completely fallacious. Every vote counts even if not for a winning candidate. A smart winning candidate - a good Member of Parliament - recognizes not everyone in a riding voted for them and yet they still have to represent the views of all citizens.
This is the issue with a representative democracy. We elect a single person to represent the views of a plurality. We expect our representative to carry forward the views of every single person. It is not possible.
However, a good Member of Parliament spends time talking to people throughout their riding. They spend time in engaged discourse with as many people as they can. Not just their supporters. (I had the strange experience before the last election of talking with Bob Zimmer and having him say "I am finally spending time in Prince George during this election." As he is one of our representatives, shouldn't he have already spent time here?)
In any case, if we want to maintain a representative democracy, the FPTP is as good a system as any. A proportional voting system would have still seen the Liberal party in power.
They would have only 134 seats and would have to form some sort of minority coalition but they would still be the government.
For most of our history, the government has been the party with the largest percentage of the popular vote so the results really wouldn't have been much different.
But if Trudeau really is interested in changing the way governance occurs in this country then it shouldn't be a question of whether or not FPTP is replaced by some other method of electing our representatives.
No. The fundamental question should be whether or not we retain the notion of a representative democracy. In an age where everyone has computer access and most people carry a smart phone, why not set up a system where we all vote on issues of importance - on every important bill?
Why not set up an electronic voting system which really does give the power to the people?
That is something worth voting for.
