• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Special Committee on Electoral Reform ERRE Ï NUMBER 033 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 42nd PARLIAMENT EVIDENCE Thursday, September 29, 2016 Chair Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia 1 Special Committee on Electoral Reform Thursday, September 29, 2016 whole regions of Canada may have little or no representation in the government. It results in the under-representation of women, Ï (1340) minorities, and first nations peoples. It gives a sense of the lost [English] vote—“Why should I vote? It's not going to be counted. It's not The Chair (Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.)): worth anything”—and may even lead to strategic voting, the feeling Welcome, all, to the 33rd meeting of Special Committee on Electoral that you have to vote for a less preferred candidate because otherwise Reform. your vote simply wouldn't count. It can also lead to what is viewed as a hyper-partisan adversarial political culture in the country. We welcome Ms. Georgina Jolibois here today. Thank you for joining us, I think you'll find it very interesting. Having looked at these problems, our next step was to look at We've had some great testimony, and it's an extremely timely and whether there might be some alternatives that would better address interesting topic. these concerns. In order to do so, we had to come up with some criteria, some political values that may be promoted in a given I would like to welcome our two witnesses: Roderick Wood, electoral system so that we could test the other models against these professor, faculty of law, University of Alberta; and Patricia Paradis, criteria. When I look at them, they seem congruent with the criteria executive director of the Centre for Constitutional Studies at the mentioned in the mandate of this committee. We thought that University of Alberta. We're very pleased that you are able to be here fairness in translating votes to seats, proportionality, and giving today. citizens the sense that their votes will be counted were all important Without further ado, we'll start with Professor Wood for 10 matters. minutes. Mr. Roderick Wood (Professor, Faculty of Law, University of We looked at the promotion of regional balance. All parts of Alberta, As an Individual): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for Canada should be represented in the government. We should try to your very kind invitation to appear today. I believe that a country avoid the electoral deserts or wastelands that can be created, which that is willing to examine its electoral system is much stronger for then sometimes pit one region of Canada against another. We wanted doing so. a system that would promote effective and accountable government and effective opposition. Twelve years ago, the Law Commission of Canada published its report on electoral reform. I was a commissioner with the Law Commission and I participated in the production of that report. What We looked to demographic representation, the idea that the I wanted to do today was to talk a little bit about how it was that we government should reflect the diversity of the people in the society, came to the conclusion that we did. I can say that in the 12 years that particularly women, minorities, and first nations people. We wanted have passed since the publication of the report I have not changed a system that might better promote inclusive decision-making and my view that the mixed member proportional system is a better consensus-building in place of adversarial partisan politics. choice than the existing system, and is to be preferred over other alternatives. Having defined these criteria, we then looked at the different However, there is one element of the report that I have changed electoral models and tried to evaluate how they stacked up against my mind about in light of new information that wasn't available at these criteria. We looked at alternative voting and saw that it has the time of the Law Commission's report. That is the issue of open benefits over the existing system. For us, the difficulty with lists versus closed lists, which I can talk about in a while. alternative voting was in its disproportionality. It really didn't address the question of proportionality, and possibly it might make In looking at the question, as law reform commissions do, we things worse. It didn't address the problem of regional balance. It asked, “Is there a problem with the existing order?” What we heard didn't address the lack of diversity in terms of the representatives in was that there were severe concerns about the existing system. You government. So, we moved on and looked at systems of proportional are likely very familiar with these so I won't dwell on them, but representation. We looked at list PR systems, such as they have in briefly, the existing system results in disproportionality, the creation Europe; the single transferable vote, used in municipal politics and of artificial majorities, regional imbalances, and what the Jenkins for a time provincially in Alberta and Manitoba; and mixed member commission referred to as the creation of electoral deserts, in which proportional representation, MMP. 2 ERRE-33 September 29, 2016 Ï (1345) referendum, although one should very carefully consider the possibility of a referendum on the matter. What we concluded was that of those, MMP for us was the best choice. I think the key factor for us was the geographic One of the difficulties with a referendum, of course, is that in representation that it provided, that direct link between the voter, many cases, regardless of how much you try to have a public the constituency, and the MP representing that. We thought it was information campaign, many voters will not be informed and when it important to retain that feature of the electoral system, and the MMP comes time to cast their votes it will be, better the devil we know had that element, yet it also addressed the other problems we had than the devil we don't know, and first past the post will remain, out identified. As for the lack of proportionality, it was addressed by of inertia. MMP; the idea of the wasted vote, that was reduced in the system of MMP; the regional balance, that was addressed; under-representation Ï (1350) of minorities and women... We saw in New Zealand there was a sharp increase in representation after the introduction of MMP in One possibility would be to have the referendum after the change. those countries. For that reason, we thought that MMP was a better That may sound strange, but essentially what you'd be doing is choice. offering people a trial period. Following that, we looked at criticisms that had been launched You'd say, “Voters, here's a new system. We've consulted broadly. against MMP, to see if they carried any validity. The three criticisms This is what we are proposing to put in. Try it out for an election, that are often made against MMP are that it creates unstable and at the next election you'll vote on whether to retain it or revert to governments, that it creates two classes of MP, the list MP and the the old one.” Then, voters would be voting fully informed. They constituency MP, and that it is susceptible of having a splinter group, would have experience with the old system and the new one. You a small political party holding the balance of power, which would be would have an informed choice made by the electorate, which undesirable. We looked at that and we thought that these criticisms otherwise is difficult to achieve with electoral reform. were exaggerated. Thank you very much. We looked at countries that do have MMP—Germany, Scotland, Wales, and New Zealand—and there's no evidence that their The Chair: Thank you very much, Professor Wood. governments are unstable. Yes, they govern without having a majority, but they're not unstable democracies. We'll go now to Ms. Paradis. We looked at the argument of the creation of two classes of MP, [Translation] the worry being that the list MP, not being voted in, would be the second-class citizen. We saw that wasn't the case. In Germany, in Ms. Patricia Paradis (Executive Director, Centre for Consti- New Zealand, they're both MPs and their parties ensure that the list tutional Studies, University of Alberta, As an Individual): Thank members have an equitable division in terms of constituency work. you, Mr. Chair. In fact, for voter choice it enhances them, because you can go to [English] your constituency MP, you also have a regional MP you can go to, and that may be a person from a different party. I would also like to thank you very much for the invitation to Finally, the splinter-party worry and domination by a tiny, little address the committee. It's a wonderful opportunity, and it's a great party...well, that's controlled through thresholds, so we concluded thing that we are actually engaging in the process in Canada. Thank that simply wasn't a problem. you. After doing this, after deciding on MMP, there are a number of What I'm going to do is answer some of the questions that were technical issues you have to address, if that were the route you were put to us in the documentation you sent. taking. There'd be the question of the open list versus the closed list, or the semi-open list. A decision would have to be made about that; The first question was on why electoral reform is important.

Load more

  54

Copy Link