How about electoral reform? People could see that their votes are reflected in the Commons. It wouldn’t change this election (maybe), but it would defeat some of the polarizing cynicism.
I think it would have some major upsides. As it is now the CPC will be looking to bring down the government as soon as they think they have the advantage. FPTP rewards throwing the dice that way. Under PR there might be less incentive for that source of instability.
Another major benefit would be
the election of government MPs from AB and SK. A lot of citizens voted Liberal in those provinces and have next to nothing to show for it.
I agree with the poster below that now is the time for all of the parties to comes together to change the voting system to mixed member proportional. The current system is divisive and archaic.
Conservatives should have more confidence in themselves that they too could negotiate a coalition government to further their policies and values.
I don't see how we get to MMP. Liberals and Conservatives benefit too much from the current system. Even the Bloc may be reluctant to change. I'd be happy with Alternative Vote at this point.
" would be hugely disappointed if such a moment ripe for reform was wasted on AV as it would hardly change the political dynamics."
HOWEVER, it would ensure that every duly elected Member of the House of Commons -- Member of Parliament would been elected with an absolute majority of the vote in the Federal Electoral District.
On the other hand, the Mixed Member Proportional Representation would require two types of Members of the House of Commons -- Members of Parliament:
1. Constituency Members to be elected by the electors either on a First Past The (Movable) Post, or by Single Transferable Vote -- Alternate Preferential Vote; t and
2. List Members to be elected by a Vote for a particular Political Party.
Currently, the only way that the List Members could be elected Constitutionally would be by the Provincial Popular Vote pursuant to the CONSTITUTION ACT 1867, Part IV --- LEGISLATIVE POWER, Section 52:
"Increase of Number of House of Commons
52 The Number of Members of the House of Commons may be from Time to Time increased by the Parliament of Canada, provided the proportionate Representation of the Provinces prescribed by this Act is not thereby disturbed."
That Constitutional Clause could be amended by the CONSTITUTION ACT 1982, Part V -- PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING CONSTITUTION OF CANADA, Sections 42(1) and 38(1):
"42 (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made only in accordance with subsection 38(1):
(a) the principle of proportionate representation of the provinces in the House of Commons prescribed by the Constitution of Canada;" and
"General procedure for amending Constitution of Canada
38 (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by
(a) resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons; and
(b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of all the provinces."
Therefore, it will be very difficult to implement a fair Mixed Member Proportional Representation system in Canada.
On polarization: I don’t see the 41.5% of voters who went Conservative as being mainly motivated by culture war garbage. A core of them, sure. But I suspect most were voting for affordability, low taxes, and cracking down on crime and disorder in the streets - just the stuff Poilievre emphasized. Those are ‘normal’ issues that need not spawn toxic polarization. This election is not a symptom of polarization, then; and if we do see intensifying polarization from here, I suspect it will be the result of deliberate choice: specifically, a decision by Conservative leadership to double down on MAGA North. Hopefully they don’t go that route.
Thank you for your measured and insightful commentary. Not easy to find these days. We are going to have to work hard to persuade far right conservatives to move away from radicalism.
The divide is largely between urban and rural. And that's a separation that will not be easily resolved as long as there are politicians eager to capitalize on division.
Even if Harris had won in the U.S., I suspect the Cons wouldn't have pivoted that well with a likeable Carney. Yes, they would have won, but I suspect maybe just a minority instead of the bloodbath it was looking like in December. So yes, I see the Liberal fortunes being largely due to Trump, but also a good chunk because Carney turned out to be a decent candidate.
Agreed. To add....I want an NDP government with a Green minority. I am sick of bipartisan voting. When Canadians talk about voting for "real change" I have no other response than an eyeroll.
Yup, definitely time to reform our electoral system to some version of proportional representation so that everyone's vote counts and their views are represented in our legislative representatives. First-past-the-post just promotes polarized political division and negates any votes that didn't go to the party that won, even if they had WAY less than a majority of the vote. Canada is NOT a 2-party political system like the US. We have several good parties and they should all have a voice at the table. Right now, they don't.
This is an affront to Western values. To hard work, to independent thought and action and to the entrepreneurial spirit that made the West great.
This represents a rejection of the ideas of the west and, as always, an interest only in our resources and money. It is an re-affirmation of the enormous east-west divide in our country. The east demands irresponsible spending (on frivolous things) huge government and unreal deficits! The West needs to reject this in a boycott and eventually in separation. The east will say they want unity but it is a lie they want conformity. The West should and will separate from what has now become a ship of fools.
First, your spelling sucks, likely because your head is up your ass. Second, your lame arguments are tired and repetitive. I’m good with Canada, you are not.
I am interested if this election supports the idea that the traditional media have a steadily decreasing impact in deciding elections. Maybe the horse race coverage is their primary function. This is a problem when civic knowledge
and education seems lacking. And, as in the USA, the very definition of “journalism” needs to be clarified.
How about electoral reform? People could see that their votes are reflected in the Commons. It wouldn’t change this election (maybe), but it would defeat some of the polarizing cynicism.
I think it would have some major upsides. As it is now the CPC will be looking to bring down the government as soon as they think they have the advantage. FPTP rewards throwing the dice that way. Under PR there might be less incentive for that source of instability.
Another major benefit would be
the election of government MPs from AB and SK. A lot of citizens voted Liberal in those provinces and have next to nothing to show for it.
I agree with the poster below that now is the time for all of the parties to comes together to change the voting system to mixed member proportional. The current system is divisive and archaic.
Conservatives should have more confidence in themselves that they too could negotiate a coalition government to further their policies and values.
I don't see how we get to MMP. Liberals and Conservatives benefit too much from the current system. Even the Bloc may be reluctant to change. I'd be happy with Alternative Vote at this point.
Hope springs eternal I guess in a moment that calls for putting country way before party.
I would be hugely disappointed if such a moment ripe for reform was wasted on AV as it would hardly change the political dynamics.
Jason
" would be hugely disappointed if such a moment ripe for reform was wasted on AV as it would hardly change the political dynamics."
HOWEVER, it would ensure that every duly elected Member of the House of Commons -- Member of Parliament would been elected with an absolute majority of the vote in the Federal Electoral District.
On the other hand, the Mixed Member Proportional Representation would require two types of Members of the House of Commons -- Members of Parliament:
1. Constituency Members to be elected by the electors either on a First Past The (Movable) Post, or by Single Transferable Vote -- Alternate Preferential Vote; t and
2. List Members to be elected by a Vote for a particular Political Party.
Currently, the only way that the List Members could be elected Constitutionally would be by the Provincial Popular Vote pursuant to the CONSTITUTION ACT 1867, Part IV --- LEGISLATIVE POWER, Section 52:
"Increase of Number of House of Commons
52 The Number of Members of the House of Commons may be from Time to Time increased by the Parliament of Canada, provided the proportionate Representation of the Provinces prescribed by this Act is not thereby disturbed."
That Constitutional Clause could be amended by the CONSTITUTION ACT 1982, Part V -- PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING CONSTITUTION OF CANADA, Sections 42(1) and 38(1):
"42 (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made only in accordance with subsection 38(1):
(a) the principle of proportionate representation of the provinces in the House of Commons prescribed by the Constitution of Canada;" and
"General procedure for amending Constitution of Canada
38 (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by
(a) resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons; and
(b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of all the provinces."
Therefore, it will be very difficult to implement a fair Mixed Member Proportional Representation system in Canada.
Ronald A. McCallum
Source:
CONSTITUTION ACTS 1867 TO 1982:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/
"
On polarization: I don’t see the 41.5% of voters who went Conservative as being mainly motivated by culture war garbage. A core of them, sure. But I suspect most were voting for affordability, low taxes, and cracking down on crime and disorder in the streets - just the stuff Poilievre emphasized. Those are ‘normal’ issues that need not spawn toxic polarization. This election is not a symptom of polarization, then; and if we do see intensifying polarization from here, I suspect it will be the result of deliberate choice: specifically, a decision by Conservative leadership to double down on MAGA North. Hopefully they don’t go that route.
Thank you for your measured and insightful commentary. Not easy to find these days. We are going to have to work hard to persuade far right conservatives to move away from radicalism.
The divide is largely between urban and rural. And that's a separation that will not be easily resolved as long as there are politicians eager to capitalize on division.
Even if Harris had won in the U.S., I suspect the Cons wouldn't have pivoted that well with a likeable Carney. Yes, they would have won, but I suspect maybe just a minority instead of the bloodbath it was looking like in December. So yes, I see the Liberal fortunes being largely due to Trump, but also a good chunk because Carney turned out to be a decent candidate.
Agreed. To add....I want an NDP government with a Green minority. I am sick of bipartisan voting. When Canadians talk about voting for "real change" I have no other response than an eyeroll.
Yup, definitely time to reform our electoral system to some version of proportional representation so that everyone's vote counts and their views are represented in our legislative representatives. First-past-the-post just promotes polarized political division and negates any votes that didn't go to the party that won, even if they had WAY less than a majority of the vote. Canada is NOT a 2-party political system like the US. We have several good parties and they should all have a voice at the table. Right now, they don't.
This is an affront to Western values. To hard work, to independent thought and action and to the entrepreneurial spirit that made the West great.
This represents a rejection of the ideas of the west and, as always, an interest only in our resources and money. It is an re-affirmation of the enormous east-west divide in our country. The east demands irresponsible spending (on frivolous things) huge government and unreal deficits! The West needs to reject this in a boycott and eventually in separation. The east will say they want unity but it is a lie they want conformity. The West should and will separate from what has now become a ship of fools.
There you go with the division stuff…me me me. Swallow your hate and raise a Canadian flag!
I think you have replied to me. You should know you’re on mute ….maybe you should do the same?😂
Sorry is the “Stephen Short of brains?”😂
First, your spelling sucks, likely because your head is up your ass. Second, your lame arguments are tired and repetitive. I’m good with Canada, you are not.
Stick your elbows up your ass your heads already there. Me me me is Ontario you’ve been doing this for 128 years look it up
I am interested if this election supports the idea that the traditional media have a steadily decreasing impact in deciding elections. Maybe the horse race coverage is their primary function. This is a problem when civic knowledge
and education seems lacking. And, as in the USA, the very definition of “journalism” needs to be clarified.