In This Issue Voter Malaise: Is Politics Broken? (Duration 16:30) Despite a higher than expected turnout for the recent federal election, many Canadians are not engaging in the political process. This is particularly true of the younger generation. CBC's chief political correspondent Keith Boag tries to find out if politics is broken – and if it is, who's at fault? The politicians or the voters?
News in Review Study Modules Related CBC Programs Trudeau's Surprising Majority, November 2015 Democracy Hacks: Coalition Governments Rep by Pop: Making Votes Really Count, (CBC Radio) September 2004 Democracy Hacks: Proportional Representation Election Polls: Taking the Pulse, October 1993 (CBC Radio) Elizabeth May Interview God Save Justin Trudeau
Credits News in Review is produced by CBC News Resource Guide Writer/Editor: Sean Dolan Host: Michael Serapio Packaging Producer: Marie-Hélène Savard Associate Producer: Agathe Carrier Supervising Manager: Laraine Bone
Visit us at our website at curio.ca/newsinreview, where you will find an electronic version of this resource guide and an archive of all previous News in Review seasons. As a companion resource, we recommend that students and teachers access CBC News Online, a multimedia current news source that is found on the CBC’s home page at cbc.ca/news/. Closed Captioning News in Review programs are closed captioned for the hearing impaired, for English as a Second Language students, or for situations in which the additional on-screen print component will enhance learning.
CBC Learning authorizes the reproduction of material contained in this resource guide for educational purposes. Please identify the source.
News in Review is distributed by: CBC Learning | Curio.ca, P.O. Box 500, Stn A, Toronto, ON, Canada M5W 1E6 | www.curio.ca
Copyright © 2015 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
News in Review – December 2015 – Teacher Resource Guide VOTER MALAISE: Is Politics Broken?
VIDEO REVIEW
Before Viewing
1. Answer the question posed in the title of this story: Is politics broken? Here’s a definition to help you formulate your answer: Politics – the activities, actions, and policies that are used to gain and hold power in a government or to influence a government.*
2. The title mentions the idea of voter malaise. Do you think this title is trying to influence the way you think about this issue? If so, how? Here’s another definition that might help you answer this question: Malaise – a general feeling of weakness or discomfort, often signalling the beginning of an illness.*
*Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
Change doesn't happen when the politicians move within the goalposts. Change happens when “people shift the goalposts and create space for politicians to move more to the left, more to the right, more up, more down, more whatever. Public opinion controls politics. We still, as a society, control politics. It is a democracy. ” – Dave Meslin, community organizer and activist Does this give you more of a sense of optimism when it comes to the political process or doing you think Meslin is being naïve?
Viewing
1. What percentage of voters turned out to cast their ballot in the 2015 federal election? Why is this considered a positive result?
2. Why was a long election campaign good for Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party?
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 1
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
3. What metaphor (involving Toronto’s city hall) does Dave Meslin use to describe Canada’s political system?
4. a) Why does Meslin believe that government-issued public notices actually discourage citizen participation in the political process?
b) From Meslin’s perspective, what is the solution to this problem?
5. According to the video, what does real engagement look like?
6. Identify two of Meslin’s quick fixes for our ailing democracy?
7. Why do recent election results in Alberta give observers a sense of optimism that politics can be resurrected from the dead?
8. How did political strategist Stephen Carter manage to get two underdogs, Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi and Alberta Premier Alison Redford, elected to office?
9. What does Stephen Carter think of the average voter?
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 2
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
10. While the NDP views their victory in Alberta as a validation of their policies, what does Stephen Carter think really happened? What motivated most voters to vote for the NDP?
11. Why is Stephen Carter so cynical about the electoral process? Focus on the rise of his candidate, Naheed Nenshi, in your answer.
12. What is carding? Why did many people disagree with this police tactic?
13. How did Desmond Cole’s Toronto Life story influence public opinion and inspire politicians to take a stand against carding?
14. How did Toronto Mayor John Tory handle the carding issue?
15. What does Desmond Cole mean when he says the following? I think we should think about who politics might be serving and who it might be leaving behind, rather“ than just saying it completely works or it’s completely broken.”
16. Near the end of the video, CBC journalist Keith Boag identifies three things that we may have learned in this brief examination of the question, “Is politics broken?” Note two of the things he identifies.
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 3
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
After Viewing
1. During the video, writer and political activist Dave Meslin says: I’d like to reach a point where it’s just as normal for 40 000 people to fill a stadium for a political event“ as we do every week for a baseball game. I’m trying to figure out how to take some of those elements and add them to politics, not to the point where you’re dumbing it down and making it just a show, but I think there’s things we could learn. It’s a mix and match.
What would political parties and candidates have to do to inspire the ”kind of passion that is given to sports teams? How could they attract 40 000 people to one of their events?
2. During the video, CBC correspondent Keith Boag asks political strategist Stephen Carter if he believes we need a better electorate. Carter gives the following reply:
Oh, absolutely. We could go and we could ask somebody about healthcare policy or what drives healthcare“ policy, why we’re making the decisions that we're making. But all we have is perverse incentive, right? No one wants a healthcare system that keeps you well. They all want a healthcare system that keeps you from dying. I’m watching a guy eat a pogo over there, bacon on a stick, right? I mean, you know, dude, you’re not helping the healthcare system. But that’s it, you know, he doesn’t want us to stop him from eating a pogo. He loves pogos, right? Bacon on a stick is what he wants and then when he gets sick he wants the healthcare system to step in and help him. No, we should have stopped you from eating the pogo. They don’t care. And so if you don't care then you get exactly what you deserve. We are getting the governments that we deserve.
What do you think of Stephen Carter’s assessment of politics in Canada?” Is he being too harsh on the average voter or are we really getting the kind of politics that we deserve? Explain.
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 4
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
THE STORY Cynicism, disappointment, apathy It’s a tale of cynicism, disappointment and apathy. The consensus among most Canadians is that our political system is broken. Politicians are seen as the puppets of the wealthy. Community decision-making is so convoluted that common sense is lost in a morass of bureaucracy. Votes are deemed wasted unless ballots are cast for the winning candidate. In the end, politics has become a blood sport for the power hungry who are willing to battle it out to do the bidding of the elite.
At least that is how many Canadians feel about the current state of political affairs.
But is it really all that bad? The 2015 federal election was a fairly exciting affair. Justin Trudeau’s Liberals came from behind to not only beat the reigning Conservatives and revitalized NDP, but he also shocked the pundits by leading his party to a majority. It was political theatre at its best. However, the campaign still only attracted 68 per cent of eligible voters to the polls. Optimists claim that’s pretty good — an 11 per cent jump from the previous election and the highest voter turnout since 1993.
The worst voter turnout in Canadian history happened in 2008 when 58.8 per cent of eligible voters cast their ballot.
Oh, it sure is broke! participation in the political process. The average Community organizer, activist and author Dave voter is seen as more of a nuisance than a Meslin believes that politics in its current form is stakeholder, and this needs to change. The way to certainly broken. However, instead of harping on do this is to find ways to engage citizens in the the system’s failings, Meslin is trying to figure out political process through meaningful public why it is broken in an effort to provide appropriate meetings (not bureaucratic posturing), electoral remedies to get politics back into the hands of the reform that makes every vote count (not people. According to Meslin, the current system maintaining the current “winner takes all” system), has become a quagmire that obstructs true
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 5
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN? and creative collaboration between politicians and white citizens. The process stunk of racial citizens (not elected monarchs governing the profiling and citizens across the city responded peasants). Until changes like these are in force – forming coalitions, taking to social implemented, Canadians will continue to feel media, protesting, and generally demanding that frustrated with the system. those in power bring an end to the tactic. Eventually the citizen action movement against In 2015, Dave Meslin embarked on a North carding coalesced in a Toronto Life article by American tour to gather material for a book he Desmond Cole who put an eloquent and chilling is writing that will be called 100 Remedies for a narrative to what many critics describe as a Broken Democracy. gross invasion of people’s civil liberties. By the fall of 2015, the pressure was too great and Mayor John Tory announced the end of carding. Citizen action One way Canadians are making their voices A bright future? heard is through citizen action that circumvents Justin Trudeau’s Liberals ran a campaign the bastion of traditional politics and demands championing “Real Change” in 2015. Some of that those in power do the right thing. Case in those changes included efforts to re-democratize point: Toronto’s carding controversy. Carding is the political arena. The Liberals promised to a police tactic where people are randomly allow charities to advocate for public policy, stopped and asked to provide identification. The ease access to information rules, introduce police record the information on a form – an electoral reform, tighten campaign financing invaluable investigative tactic according to the laws, and use technology to engage more Toronto Police Service. However, an exhaustive Canadians in the political process. Whether Toronto Star investigation revealed that more these “real changes” will be implemented than one million Torontonians were carded by remains to be seen. What is apparent is that police between 2008 and 2013, with black something needs to happen to restore people’s citizens much more likely to be carded than faith in the political system.
Between 2008 and 2013, police wrote 2.1 million carding reports on over one million Torontonians.
To consider
1. Why do some people see politics as a tale of cynicism, disappointment and apathy?
2. Is there room for optimism emerging from the election results of 2015?
3. What is Dave Meslin doing in an attempt to resurrect Canadian democracy?
4. a) What is carding? How did social activists bring the police tactic to an end?
b) What do you think of carding? Is it an important police tactic or a gross violation of people’s civil liberties?
5. How do the Liberals hope to introduce “real change” to Canadian democracy?
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 6
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
In 2004, CBC News in Review produced a story called Rep by Pop: Making Votes Really Count? The story noted that the winds of change were signaling imminent electoral reform with some politicians getting behind the idea of replacing the “first-past-the-post” (FPTP) electoral system with representation by population or proportional representation (PR). Critics argued that the system Canada was employing (and has yet to change!) meant that millions of Canadians saw their votes wasted. A PR system would eliminate this because, put simply, if a party earned 43 per cent of the popular vote, that would be directly reflected in the number of seats they would be granted in the House of Commons. That is not what is happening today (as you will see). In fact, some pundits believe that the voting system continues to be the leading cause of voter disengagement and disenchantment.
Take a look at what was written back in 2004 in relation to what is going on in 2015.
Flashback 2004: Does Every Vote critics of the system point out that FPTP unfairly Count? rewards parties with “phony” majorities, distorts Many people believe that Canadian democracy, the real election results when compared to the founded on the British parliamentary model, has popular vote, and encourages regionalism. become antiquated and archaic. While certain of the Westminster institutions continue to hold their Update 2015: Every Vote Still merit, the electoral system in particular is raising Doesn’t Count calls for dramatic transformation. Why? Because, Take a look at the results of the 2015 federal when put under the political microscope, it appears election and see if the critics of FPTP in 2004 that many Canadians are not getting what they are continue to be correct. voting for. Canada uses the “first-past-the-post” Seats won (% of 338 %of Popular Party (FPTP) electoral system. In the current FPTP Seats in Parliament) Vote system, Canada is sectioned off into over 300 Liberal 184 seats / 54.4 per cent 39.5 per cent electoral districts with the candidate who wins the Conservative 99 seats / 29.3 per cent 31.9 per cent most votes in each district earning a seat in the NDP 44 seats / 13 per cent 19.7 per cent House of Commons. Advocates for FPTP like the Bloc Quebecois 10 seats / 2.9 per cent 4.7 per cent ease involved in electing and forming governments. However, while this sounds reasonable at a glance, Green 1 seats / 0.3 per cent 3.5 per cent Analysis questions 1. Did the election result in a ‘phony’ majority? In other words, did the winner actually receive more than 50 per cent of the votes?
2. Did any of the parties receive fewer seats in parliament than they earned in the popular vote?
3. Did any of the parties target a particular region or province of Canada to amass votes?
4. Do you see the systemic weaknesses of FPTP?
Back in 2004, the Law Commission of Canada published a report that called for a system that blended FPTP and PR. This way Canadians could vote for local candidates and cast their ballot for the party platform that they agreed with most. Lauded by academics, the report was ignored by politicians.
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 7
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
Flashback 2004: Wasted Votes and Update 2015: Still the same Strategic Voting Take a look back at the election results. If an election is FPTP carries with it two unfortunate side the process of choosing a government as a reflection of effects: wasted votes and strategic voting. Votes the ballot you cast, shouldn’t that be demonstrated in are wasted when a candidate wins in a riding the results? In 2015, 60 per cent of voters did not despite failing to win a majority of the votes in choose the Liberals – the party that, by virtue of its the district. This is a common phenomenon in majority status, can push through almost any Canada where each district often has many legislation while they are in power. Put another way, candidates vying for a seat in the House. In 60 per cent of voters technically “wasted” their vote in FPTP, the “winner takes all” – even if they only 2015. win by one vote - and the people who voted for the losing candidates see their votes fall with Also, many people believe that, while Justin Trudeau their candidate. The other problem associated and the Liberals brought a fresh approach to politics in with FPTP is strategic voting. Some Canadians 2015, their majority government was more of a have voted against their own political beliefs reactive vote to end the ten-year reign of the Harper because they do not want to see the front- Conservatives. No doubt, in some ridings across running candidate in their district win power. Canada, voters were placed in a position where, if they Thus, they strategically vote for the candidate wanted the incumbent Conservative candidate who is most likely to beat the candidate they defeated, they would have to vote for the candidate dislike instead of voting according to party who stood the best chance of winning the seat. In other platform or political affiliation. It is a risky and words, some NDP supporters may have voted Liberal often unsatisfactory approach to dealing with the if they wanted the Conservative ousted because the problems of FPTP. Liberal had the best chance of winning the seat. This is an example of strategic voting and it happens in all FPTP elections.
Flashback 2004: Making Every Vote Update 2015: Skepticism with a dash Count of hope Some political insiders believe that the solution to While the climate was ripe for change back in the problem would be to introduce an electoral 2004, Canada’s politicians did not make a serious system that awards seats in parliament as a effort to reform the system, despite the fact that reflection of the percentage of the popular vote nearly 90 per cent of the world’s democracies use earned by each party. This type of system is some form of proportional system! This inaction referred to as proportional representation (PR). also flew in the face of a number of provincial Most modern democracies use some sort of referendums – in PEI, Ontario, and two in BC – proportional system. In fact, only Canada, Britain, calling for electoral reform. In the 2015 campaign the United States and India still use FPTP at the the Liberals promised bring an end to FPTP while national level; everyone else has turned to some the NDP specifically vowed to introduce variation of PR for national elections. However, the proportional representation by the next election. climate is ripe for change. Skeptics doubt that the politicians will follow through. After all, electoral reform and PR seemed to be all the rage back in 2004.
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 8
DECEMBER 2015 – VOTER MALAISE: IS POLITICS BROKEN?
Flashback 2004: What’s Next? Update 2015: The “Tipping Point”? Advocates for PR believe that voters will feel It seems the tables didn’t tip quite enough back their voices are being heard in a proportional in 2004. Nonetheless, there may be hope for PR system. In turn, PR could foster a sense of more than a decade later. Besides the fact that responsibility and more active involvement by the Liberals and NDP are vowing to throw their more people in the political process. Time will weight behind electoral reform, Fair Vote tell if PR is the remedy for the democratic deficit Canada has managed to maintain their relevance or just another political trend. However, by rallying the support of over 60 000 Canadian according to Larry Gordon of Fair Vote Canada, through an online petition calling for electoral we are at the “tipping point” on election reform*. reform. They also have 500 academics from If PR advocates can tip the tables enough, the across Canada calling for end to FPTP and the shape of elections and governance may change introduction of PR. dramatically.
*Source: Gordon, Larry (April 14, 2004). Time to shed an old political skin. Globe and Mail.
For much more on Proportional Representation (PR) go to curio.ca and find the September 2004 CBC News in Review entitled Rep by Pop: Making Votes Really Count? curio.ca/en/video/rep‐by‐pop‐making‐votes‐really‐count‐2071/
To consider
1. How does FPTP promote “phony” majorities, regionalism, and wasted votes?
2. What is strategic voting? Why do people criticize FPTP for unwittingly encouraging voters to resort to this tactic?
3. How did Fair Vote Canada manage to avoid obscurity between 2004 (when it looked like PR was about to be implemented) and 2015?
4. a) Why do you think politicians avoided PR back in 2004 and chose to cling to FPTP? Why didn’t they respond to calls for electoral reform put forward in provincial referendums and by groups like Fair Vote Canada?
b) Do you think politicians will introduce some form of PR before the next federal election?
News in Review ∙ CBC Learning ∙ curio.ca/newsinreview 9