Write a new plan for electoral reform

Promise voters in haste, repent at leisure. This political twist on an old saying carries a biting truth for Justin Trudeau as he tries to escape the electoral-reform hole he dug himself into during last year’s nationwide vote.

The prime minister was lambasted this week by critics who accused him of backsliding on the Liberal campaign pledge “that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.”

While that vow helped Trudeau win the election, he told a Quebec newspaper the clamour for reform has subsided since he and the Liberals replaced the Stephen Harper Conservatives a year ago. Furthermore, the PM insisted any major change to the voting system will require “substantial” public support.

While Trudeau later said he remains “deeply committed” to electoral reform, he has not produced a fully drawn map that can lead Canadians to the electoral promised land. It’s time he did.

Sure, a parliamentary committee has been consulting Canadians and will deliver its recommendations in December. If the Liberals act swiftly, they can probably put a new voting system in place for the 2019 federal election.

But how can they properly choose a legitimate, new voting system when there are strengths and weaknesses in each one and different political parties will gain most depending on which system is selected? Meanwhile, the options are both limited and poorly understood by voters.

The Liberals campaigned on a platform that the current first-past-the-post system — where the candidate with the most votes wins — is unfair and must go. Yet while they’ve undermined the legitimacy of this system, it’s what catapulted them to power and authorizes them to change how we vote. They captured a whopping House of Commons majority with just over 39 per cent of the popular vote, which is precisely what the Conservatives did in 2011.

The New Democrats, along with many advocates of reform, demand some version of proportional representation. That system would give each party a number of seats in the House of Commons that roughly corresponds to the percentage of overall votes it receives.

The Liberals may feel more disposed to giving Canadians a ranked ballot where second choices would be counted into the mix if no candidate won an outright majority of votes.

But no choice is perfect. If the Liberals pick proportional representation, their chances of winning another majority government and wielding the power that confers will be virtually non-existent as long as four mainstream parties are competing for votes. Canada could face a future of greater political instability, too.

However, if the Liberals opt for a ranked ballot they will be charged with advancing their own self-interest. That’s because of the widely shared assumption that NDP voters on the left and Conservative voters on the right would be most inclined to make a more centrist Liberal their second choice. We have two suggestions for the Liberals:

First, consider a longer timetable for reform. Changing the voting system will change Canadian democracy for a long time. The crucial decision must not be made lightly or precipitously. Canadians were forgiving when the Liberals took longer to settle 25,000 Syrian refugees than they had originally pledged. Most Canadians will understand if a new voting system is not in place for the next election. More time would allow a nationwide education program and encourage a true buy-in across the land.

Second, make good on the promise of Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef that the government “will not move forward on any reforms without the broad support of Canadians.”

There is no widely shared agreement today on which system Canada should adopt. The Liberals have rejected holding a national referendum on the matter. They should either reconsider a referendum or tell us how we can be sure most Canadians favour whatever new system is chosen. After all, isn’t this entire exercise about empowering the majority?