Those who want to manipulate
the present voting system are seeking after un-earned power...admit it. However, the consequences of varied formulas,
will be poorer governance for the country, and that should matter more than anything
else. Our nation would not be better
off, and likely could descend to political weakness with jigged systems. The international challenges are too great,
for Canada to shoot itself in the foot.
The recent issue began with the big lie, that the voting system was broken
and needed "reform". Our
voting system works just fine, and Elections Canada has sufficient power to tweak
things along the way. We must be vigilant
about ‘what’ is being proposed, as well as ‘who’ is doing the proposing. PF
* * * *
* * *
PM's
backtracking on electoral reform a positive move
Lydia
Miljan -
Taylor Jackson Vancouver Sun February 2, 2017
The
federal government is walking away from its campaign promise to change the way
Canadians vote in federal elections. In his recently released mandate letter to
Karina Gould, the newly appointed Minister of Democratic Institutions, Prime
Minister Trudeau said that “changing the electoral system will not be in your
mandate.”
The
prime minister justified his change in attitude by saying that “a clear
preference for a new electoral system, let alone a consensus, has not
emerged. Furthermore, without a clear preference or a clear question, a
referendum would not be in Canada’s interest.”
Changing
the electoral system was always going to be a complicated task. Had a
referendum taken place — and it should have — Canadians needed to fully
understand that while there may be benefits to other electoral systems, there
are also drawbacks.
Consider
a proportional representation (PR) system, which the special parliamentary
committee recommended in December. While many may know about the potential
benefit of distributing seats in parliament more closely to vote shares, there
are also costs.
For
example, a recent study found that a move to PR would likely lead to higher
government spending and larger deficits (borrowing) in Canada. Indeed, the study
found that the average size of central governments from 2000 to 2014 in
countries with PR was almost 25 per cent larger than in countries with
majoritarian/plurality election rules similar to what Canada currently employs.
The study also found that PR countries tend to finance this extra spending by
running larger deficits.
The
reason why a PR system would lead to more government spending and higher
deficits is that PR systems tend to elect more parties to the legislature,
thereby increasing the likelihood for coalition governments. In order to form
coalitions, larger parties must gain the support of smaller parties, often by
capitulating on their main issues, which leads to higher levels of government
spending.
Moreover,
smaller parties in PR systems are able to exert a disproportionate amount of
power at the expense of the preferences of the majority of voters who didn’t
vote for such parties.
Consider
the drawbacks of another system — the alternative vote (AV) or ranked ballots —
which was also a reform option. This system has the potential to reduce
competition in our elections, a key attribute of a healthy democratic system.
For
example, another recent study examined the impact of adopting AV electoral
rules on Canada’s seven federal elections between 1997 and 2015.
The
study found that only one party — the Liberals — would have gained seats in
every election. In fact, they would have gained an average of 19 seats per
election. To a lesser extent, the NDP would have increased their seat totals in
more recent elections. Only the Conservatives would have lost seats every
election.
The
study also found that AV electoral rules would have changed the outcomes in a
number of elections, including in 2006 when instead of a Conservative minority
government, the Liberals would have won a minority.
Before
any changes are made, or any referendums held, on this issue, Canadians must
understand that many of the proposed alternatives come with drawbacks. Changing
the electoral system in a hasty manner was never going to be in the interest of
Canadians.
The
government should be congratulated for its willingness to make a tough
political decision that is in the best interests of all Canadians.
Lydia
Miljan is an associate professor of political science at the University of
Windsor and a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute. Taylor Jackson is an
analyst at the Fraser Institute.
No comments:
Post a Comment