It was first created by Paul Martin in 2003 during his truncated term as prime minister and entitled the Minister responsible for Democratic Reform. Martin had expressed concern about a "democratic deficit." In 2005 the title was changed to "Democratic Renewal" and the portfolio was assumed by Belinda Stronach who had recently crossed the floor from the Conservatives. When the Conservatives won the 2006 election the title reverted to "Democratic Reform." With the election of the Liberals in 2015, the portfolio became "Minister of Democratic Institutions" replete with hope for substantial reform following Justin Trudeau's promise of, among other things, never holding another election under the undemocratic First-Past-the-Post voting system. That promise was, of course, betrayed and we have just experienced another election under FPTP.
It now appears that, with the trashing of the appropriate ministry, the Prime Minister is trashing the whole idea of a democratic voting system. Out of sight, out of mind, for a promise that came back to haunt Mr. Trudeau. Ironically, as discussed in a previous post, support for a proportional system, which would make the people's will manifest in elections, has probably never been higher. Many conservatives, who have traditionally opposed proportional representation, have been converted because in our recent election their party got more votes than the Liberals but they are forced to smoulder in opposition while Justin, he of the good hair, runs the show.
The democrats among us smoulder, too, as even the consideration of a democratic system fades entirely from the federal agenda.
2 comments:
Unfortunately I can understand the reluctance of ANY political leader jumping into the quagmire of electoral reform Bill. Its not so much that many of us want to get rid of FPTP but that there is no consensus of where to go, as a strong supporter of electoral reform and having written a number of articles about it over the years I STILL cannot say which system I prefer and some proposed systems appear to be worse that the status quo. That such a broader electoral system brings minority governments who must work together is in my view a good thing (as shown by NZ where it actually works) but I am not sure that our leader and our citizens are ready for it despite the broad call for change.
Perhaps by 2030 or so.....
Our leader certainly isn't ready for it, Rural. Becoming prime minister when only one-third of the people voted for your party is a gift horse you aren't going to look in the mouth. As for our citizens ... well, I guess they get the government they deserve.
I know exactly what form of proportional system I prefer: a system designed specifically for the unique needs of this country. The beauty of PR is that you can mix and match to derive a system for any particular country's circumstances.
For example, a Canadian system should be designed to ameliorate our highly regionalized interests. FPTP notoriously aggravates them. In our recent election, an appropriate PR system would have put five MPs from Alberta in the Liberal caucus. Under FPTP there are none and the understandable alienation erupts. Our current system isn't just bad, it is particularly bad for Canada.
Post a Comment