Why and how our expats should vote

Before advocating a radical change to Canadian elections, we ought to defend a slightly less radical change. Let’s first establish that Canadians of voting age should be allowed to vote. Then, let us give them electoral districts based on where they live.

To the first question: The Supreme Court is presently considering various specious arguments in favour of disenfranchising the roughly 10 per cent of the Canadian population residing outside the country should they remain outside for more than five years.

Canadian courts hear, for instance, that Canada’s voting restrictions match those of other democracies. If that were true, then five would be equal to 15, and to 25, and indeed to infinity — the years it takes for expat voting rights to become restricted in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France as well as Italy and Portugal, respectively. But these numbers are not equal.

Courts hear that citizens who live abroad choose their jobs over their country. If this were true, then the millions of dollars’ worth of trade fostered by expat Canadians does not materially benefit Canada. But trade does benefit Canada.

Courts hear that by leaving a country, one breaks the contract that dictates citizens choose their government in exchange for being subject to their country’s laws. If this were true, then Canadians abroad could not be charged with treason. But they can be charged with treason.

Courts hear that if citizens abroad do not pay taxes, then they should not vote. If this were true, then Canadians who do not pay taxes while residing in Canada should have their voting rights restricted, and Canadians who do pay taxes while not residing in Canada should not. But the former group can vote without restriction, and the latter cannot.

Finally, in the event a court is too easily swayed by reason, it is told that it should listen to its heart: Citizens abroad — though they may be subject to some Canadian laws, and pay some Canadian taxes, and contribute to some Canadian successes, all while Canada restricts their rights more than many other democracies would — do not feel connected to Canada. But if Canadians abroad did not feel connected to Canada, none would care to vote; of course, this matter is before the court because many care very much indeed.

So whether the Supreme Court or the Trudeau government cares about the voting rights of all Canadians, they ought to. By accepting this, however, we need not accept the idea that expats be represented by electoral districts in which they do not actually reside.

Canadian expats should have political representation of their own.

Something called the “overseas constituency” gives representation to the person who is a citizen of one place but resides in another. It does not indulge the obvious fiction that expats have no interests in or obligations to a country of their citizenship. But nor does it pretend that their interests and obligations are the same as if they lived there.

In the same way a Canadian in Calgary requires different representation than someone in Winnipeg, a Canadian in Winnipeg requires different representation than one in Stockholm. If there is any concern that Canadian expats are insufficiently connected to Canada, the overseas constituency solidifies their connection by making it official and relevant to their living circumstances.

The overseas constituency is not a common phenomenon among democracies, but nor is it so rare as to be absurd. More than a dozen countries recognize that it is better to maintain connections with all citizens than just some, and better to acknowledge that the nature of these connections shift when residences change.

France, for instance, has carved up the globe into 11 overseas constituencies for those citizens who live in different parts of it.

With nearly 10 per cent of its population living abroad compared to France’s three per cent, Canada needs overseas constituencies more than most. But is the government that broke its promise on electoral reform, that left the position of chief electoral officer vacant for a year, and that let expat voting rights legislation languish, actually the government to do it?