Sir Winston Churchill once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all of the others.” He was so correct, and it is something that we must continue, so it seems, to have to fight to preserve, right here in our own country.
Every time federal elections are held, there are those who feel that the Canadian electoral system must be redesigned. First of all, what is so undemocratic with our system as it is? Admittedly, Elections Canada could improve or modernize their system so that there would be less confusion, problems, and trouble on election day.
The federal Liberal party, recently elected to a majority government, have announced their intention to do away with the first-past-the-post majority government system.
Why? Apparently, they feel that they and only they are wise and capable enough to know what is best for Canadians. They intend to adopt the proportional representation system, and do this without a national referendum. First of all, this suggests that the Canadian public is too stupid to understand the long-term implications of such a change in the nation’s political system.
Perhaps the federal Liberals didn’t notice that British Columbia, Ontario and Prince Edward Island, have all held referendums regarding proposed changes to their respective provincial voting systems, and all have been soundly rejected.
Why? Because the proportional system as proposed is fundamentally undemocratic. What is a referendum? It is a general vote by a national, provincial or municipal electorate on a single question, which has been referred to them for a single decision.
Can the question be “rigged?” Yes it could. Any referendum must be worded in an honest and straightforward manner. It must ask that one direct question requiring a clear yes or no for an answer, and nothing more.
Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal House Leader and Prime Minister Trudeau’s so-called pointman on the matter, seems to think that our electoral system is flawed, undemocratic, and should only be changed to a proportional representational system. He also asserts that the federal government is not legally required to go to the public to make these proposed electoral changes.
The proportional system he and Trudeau are pushing for would allow Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes to skew the vote, and would almost guarantee majority Liberal governments in all future elections, perpetuating neverending Liberal control over national policy. This is undemocratic to say the least.
Should the Liberals be successful in making their intended changes to the electoral system, just to perpetuate their hold on power, it could easily mean the breakup of Canada from the Manitoba-Ontario provincial border westwards. My guess is that “The West” will never accept the fundamental unfairness of this idea.
The Liberals, while in opposition, strongly objected to the Conservative Government’s changes to the elections statutes, particularly the requirement for voters to present any one of thirty-nine (yes, 39) pieces of identification before casting a ballot. They also wanted the voucher system restored, one long notorious for fraudulent abuse. Every legitimate, registered voter should have to produce some form of government-issued identification such as a provincial driver’s licence, healthcare card, social- insurance card, native band card, passport, federal firearms licence, or military I.D. for example, or any one of a number of other pieces of identification. It should be incumbent upon all citizens to have at least one or two such items. It is not that difficult for most people to obtain them, and producing them at the ballot box facilitates honesty and integrity on election day.
Using what I understand to be the Liberal Party’s proposed formula for elections, the last Alberta election would have resulted in the following: The NDP getting approximately 53 per of the vote and winning 46 seats in the provincial legislature, the Progressive-Conservatives getting approximately 28 per of the vote, and winning 24 seats in the legislature, and the Wild Rose getting approximately 22 per of the vote, and winning 19 seats in the legislature.
Under that system, Dr. David Swann (Liberal), would not have gotten a seat in the provincial legislature, nor would Greg Clark of the Alberta Party. This in effect, would have deprived those persons who voted for the above-mentioned MLAs, the members of their choice.
This system, in my opinion, is flawed and undemocratic. A system like this effectively means that a substantial number of votes would be rendered largely meaningless and of little or no value at all. In our democratic system, when one casts their vote either federally, provincially or municipally, they are voting for the candidate of their choice, not necessarily the political party to which that candidate belongs, if they belong to one at all. This is a fundamental civil liberty that, as a people, we cannot allow to be taken away from us.
We are represented by the person that the majority of the voters selected when they voted. In a recent poll, only nine per cent of Canadians across the country felt that we needed electoral reform.
Democracy is something that, it would appear, we must continually fight to preserve. It is unfortunate and disturbing that some who assert a belief in democracy would deprive others of rights and liberties our forefathers worked so hard to get for those who would come after them. Our voting system, as is, is functional, fair and democratic, and is the best way the people have to influence decision-making and positively impact public policy.
Tampering with our system of government, functioning as well as it has for almost one hundred and fifty years, just for political gain by political parties and special interests must not be allowed.
