Elections: Time for a change?
Time for a change. How often has that dread phrase dutifully applied at election time sounded the death knell of a government and or a politician’s career? For seemingly no matter how hard and how well an individual or party campaigns once that mindset is engrained on voters it is very difficult to shift.
Right now it is the very elections themselves that are under the spotlight for reform and most likely significant change. Indeed, the Federal Liberal Government is on the record as saying, “We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the- post voting system.” Canadians may find that a majority government in the future may be a rare thing indeed.
Journalists are naturally cynical and I think I’m cynical and then some. When I’ve heard of electoral changes before I’ve tended to roll my eyes and watch for the boundary changes that purely by chance often benefit the incumbent party. Not so this time methinks. This may be the real deal.
An all party Parliamentary committee is examining a whole raft of reforms including ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting, online voting and maybe more. The committee is expected to report around the beginning on December this year.
The Conservatives are demanding a national referendum on electoral reform and Yellowhead MP Jim Eglinski has called for a referendum too. A vote to decide how we should vote. Whether there will be a referendum remains to be seen. Maybe we should have a vote to decide if we have a vote to decide how we vote? I’ll put my tongue back in my cheek now.
I have to admit that I’m not a fan of first past the post. In some, not all, constituencies when the total percentage of voters voting another way exceeds the percentage gained by the seat’s winner I’m discomforted and not surprised when I’ve heard that some voters think their vote is wasted. No vote should ever be regarded as wasted. Some form of proportional representation is most likely the reform the Conservatives like least.
We asked Eglinski what he thought of other possible reforms. He said he was personally OK with some form of online voting and mandatory voting bit not OK with under 18s voting, the latter being outside the committee’s mandate.
I would have liked to see 16 and 17-year-olds being part of the mandate. One can get a driving licence in Canada, get married (with parental consent) and join the army (with parental consent). I reckon if you’re old enough to do those things you’re old enough to vote. I also think that it would be a good way to get more young people politically engaged.
On ranked ballots Eglinski said, “Ranked ballots and similar forms of voting appear to lead to a great deal of complexity, inefficiency, and confusion. Take the recent Australian elections: it took weeks to determine the winner. Moreover, in the Canadian context ranked ballots appear to favour one party in particular: The Liberal Party of Canada. This is why a referendum is so important. When it comes to the value of our vote, politicians should not be deciding how politicians are elected.”
We also asked about what Eglinski thought about Permanent Residents having the right to stand and vote in municipal elections. “Canadian citizenship is a very precious thing. I would not support any change to the democratic rights associated with Citizenship,” said Eglinski.
On Permanent Residents, being one myself. I agree with the sentiments about Canadian citizenship. However, Permanent Residents can vote in local and state elections in the U.S. And, I don’t really see the problem. In fact, I think that this could allow immigrants to engage with their communities better and might be a valuable tool against radicalisation.
Whatever the recommendations of the committee and with or without a referendum I suspect that Elections Canada will have to burn the midnight oil to get ready for 2019.