We will soon head into another federal election. Democratic Reform will again be a significant issue.
The Government of Canada launched a democratic reform initiative in 2015 that went nowhere because politicians did not see how they could benefit from it. Because they gain power from our democratic system of government, they cannot be trusted to reform it.
Why not take this issue out of the hands of politicians, and just let the people decide the base elements of democratic reform in a referendum?
What follows are some possible reforms that may be worth considering, and why they may be worthwhile. It is suggested that if Canadians voted 55% or more in favour of any of these (a clear majority as we don't want a Brexit situation concerning something this important!), then the government should undertake to propose the necessary changes to our democratic laws to Parliament make them so.
1. Term Limits: No one should be able to sit as a Member of Parliament for longer than the life of three consecutive Parliaments, or a maximum of 12 years.
- Absolute power corrupts absolutely, so a bit of power will corrupt a bit. Not all politicians are corrupt, in fact most are not. Nonetheless, a few bad apples are a few too many. The longer they stay, the greater the chances that they will abuse their position. Let politicians take a break after 12 years and get a small pension. Let them run again after they take one mandate off. If they choose to just retire, there are plenty of other qualified people who can replace them. Of course, because the Prime Minister is a Member of Parliament, this means that no PM can serve longer than 12 consecutive years.
2. Recall: Constituents should be able to recall their Member of Parliament and force a by-election, subject to strict criteria, such as 60% of electors in a riding signing a petition demanding a recall by-election within a 90 period.
- It is ridiculous that MPs cannot be fired by the people they represent between elections. A recall by-election should be difficult to launch, but if an MP's behaviour warrants his or her firing, this option should be available to constituents.
3. Mandatory Voting: Every citizen should be required to vote in a federal election, with a small fine being levied against those who do not do so.
- It works in Australia! Taking 30 minutes every four years to show up to vote is not too much to ask in a democracy. If voters do not like the candidates, they are free to spoil their ballots, but it is important that everyone be included in an election to add to the integrity of every Parliament’s mandate. If added to Internet voting, this is a "no-brainer".
4. Ranked Voting/Preferential Ballot (Alternative is a Run-Off Vote): Voters should be able to rank their preferences on a ballot, by indicating their first, second and third choices for their Member of Parliament. Rounds of votes should be counted until someone receives more than 50% of the votes. The candidate who receives the greatest amount of support over 50% will win the seat.
As an alternative, there could be a run-off election after the main vote. If no one no one got more than 50% of the vote, there would be a run-off between the top two candidates, to make sure the winner can show they received more than 50% of the vote.
Note - The supporters of proportional representation argue that with the first-past-the-post system the winner of a riding is usually elected by only a plurality - that “their vote did not count”. Actually, all votes are counted, and these people are really complaining that the person they preferred as their representative didn’t win with a level of support that is enough to leave no question in anyone’s mind as to their mandate to represent the riding. To deal with this, ask that voters rank their top three preferences, and count rounds of votes until the winner shows the greatest level of support over 50%. This will allow the winner to be able to show that they did, in fact, get the over 50% of the vote. It also opens a world of possibility to parties that usually get a significant percentage of the vote, but which cannot convince more than a handful of constituents in a given riding to support their candidate. If they work to become everyone’s second choice, they could actually govern one day. Having a run-off between the top two candidates a few weeks after the main vote where no one got over 50% would do the same thing.
5. No More than 75,000 Constituents per Riding: Make sure that Members of Parliament represent no more than 75,000 people, which would increase the size of the present House of Commons to about 470 members.
- This will dramatically increase the size of the House of Commons, but in so doing, it will also dilute the control that political parties have over their members, freeing them up to more often vote their conscience as informed by the will of their constituents. It does this by making it more remote that a given MP will ever become a minister of the Crown; the desire for which is the primary reason that MPs are loyal to their parties.
6. National Referenda: Citizens should be able to trigger a referendum on any issue, subject to strict criteria, such as 50% of national electors signing a petition within a 90 day period demanding the same.
- Citizens should be able to launch national referenda on issues of the day. It should be hard to do this, limiting the number of referenda that may go ahead, but the option should be available so that whether or not referenda are launched is not entirely subject to the interests of political parties.
7. Senate Reform: The Senate should be elected, with elections being organized by whatever method suits the provinces and territories that they represent, with the Primer Minister nominating the winners as future senators. However, an elected Senate should continue with its traditional "sober second thought" role so as to not become a legislative competitor to the House of Commons.
- It is time for an elected Senate in Canada. Our constitutional framework requires that the Senate only perform a “sober second thought” role, and that the lead legislature still be the House of Commons. Nonetheless, as long as this basic role does not change, there is no reason why the Senate cannot be elected - there are elected Senators right now.
8. Restore Public Financing of Political Parties: The yearly stipend that political parties used to receive should be restored, but with the caveat that citizens should be able to direct their stipend to whatever political party they prefer, perhaps through the use of a box on their yearly income tax form.
- It may make sense to restore the yearly public stipend to political parties, perhaps at a rate of $2.00 per voter. It its previous incarnation, the yearly stipend was awarded based on the results of the previous election, so that parties like the Greens would get, say 4% of all available funds because the got 4% of the popular vote in the previous election. This could not be changed between elections no matter what the political party in question did in the years after the election in question. If voters could direct these funds between elections on their tax forms, they would have an ability to reward those parties that performed well, and punish those that didn’t by directing their stipend to whatever party suited their fancy and withholding it from others, between elections.
Again, these potential changes could be put to the population in a national referendum on democratic reform. As noted, whatever they say "yes" to with 55% + support should be implemented as soon as possible. A national referendum could be said to be required so that reform of our democracy is not subject to the interests of political parties which work within the system, but should never be rulers of that same system; their conflict of interest is crystal clear.
The potential Referendum Questions follow.
1. Should Members of Parliament be limited to serving or no more than 12 consecutive years?
2. Should constituents be able to recall their Members of Parliament?
3. Should voting be mandatory?
4. Should citizens elect their representatives through the use of a preferential or ranked ballot? (Alternative - Should citizens elect their representatives through the use of a run-off election after the main vote, where if no one got more than 50% of the vote, then there would be a run-off election between the top two candidates, to make sure the winner can show they received more than 50% of the vote?)
5. Should Members of Parliament represent no more than an average of 75,000 constituents?
6. Should citizens have the ability to trigger national referenda?
7. Should Senators be elected?
8. Should the yearly stipend to political parties be restored with the caveat that citizens should be able to direct the payments between elections?
