(This is a continuation of Part 1 at this link.)
Both Fair Vote Canada and the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting have long pointed to the fact that, quote, “in Canada’s current electoral system, the majority of voters cast ballots for a candidate who does not get elected.”
In the next few months that statement/fact will become even more prominent in the work of both of those organizations.
That statement is found in MP Lisa Marie Barron’s Private Member’s motion, M-86, to establish a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform. That motion is actively supported by Fair Vote Canada. See link. It will be debated in the fall of 2023 and voted on either in the fall of 2023 or early 2024.
But even before that happens, the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting has a court date of Sep 26 in Toronto, and its case evidence also includes a variation of that same statement of fact.
[ UPDATE ]:
The case was first heard in the Ontario Superior Court from Sep 26-28, 2023. Justice Ed Morgan handed down his ruling on Nov 30, 2023.
Unfortunately, Justice Morgan dismissed our Application, so we filed a Notice of Appeal on Dec 29, 2023. That Notice of Appeal can be downloaded from the Charter Challenge "Appeal" web page which is at this link.
Why does M-86 allow the option of not reforming something that is so clearly unfair?
The first part of the M-86 motion describes an unfair situation in which “the majority of voters cast ballots for a candidate who does not get elected.”
Given the fact that other countries can do so much better, it seems obvious that this situation is in need of reform. Yet the last part of the motion then implies that this situation may, or may not be, in need of reform: It reads:
“(b) in the opinion of the House, the government should create a Canadian citizens’ assembly on electoral reform, which would,…
…(iii) determine if electoral reform is recommended for Canada, and, if so, recommend specific measures that would foster a healthier democracy."
End Quote
Notice the word “if.”
It’s reasonable to ask the Citizens’ Assembly to “recommend specific measures that would foster a healthier democracy,” but it seems odd to give the citizens’ assembly the option of not recommending to reform a situation in which “the majority of voters cast ballots for a candidate who does not get elected.”
Was this oddity in M-86 part of a strategy to make it less binding, less threatening and therefore more likely to pass?
In any case, because of this oddity in M-86, there is clearly a need for an additional impetus for change that is not found within M-86.
Additional Impetus for change
Additional impetus for change would come if the plans of the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting are successful in the following two goals: 1. the Supreme Court rules that our current voting system contravenes the Charter, and 2. the Supreme Court orders the government to adopt a voting system that complies with the Charter.
If that happens then the Citizens Assembly would be obligated to “determine” that “electoral reform” is indeed “recommended for Canada.” In that scenario, that obligation would likely be manifested through the power of the House of Commons instead of the courts. In other words, the act of setting up a Citizens Assembly in the first place would likely be a political decision by the House of Commons, not a legal decision that bypasses the House.
Could the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting work in Tandem with a Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform?
Réal Lavergne, former President of Fair Vote Canada, presented that possibility on Feb 16, 2023 with this quote:
“And we’re hoping that the Supreme Court will pronounce itself on that and hopefully that the Supreme Court will say you have to find a way to hand this over to citizens and the Citizens’ Assembly would be one way to do it.” (1)
In that type of tandem effort it makes a lot of sense for Fair Vote Canada to push for a Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform exactly at the same time as the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting pushes for a victory in the courts.
Footnotes:
Footnote 1:
Réal Lavergne’s quote is found here: “Advancing Proportional Representation in Canada” Stephan Kyburz interviews Réal Lavergne in this Feb 16, 2023 episode of “Rules of The Game: Discussing Democratic Institutions” Blog/Podcast See this link
Lavergne mentions that interview on his Facebook page Feb 16, 2023 (See this link): Here I paraphrase his comments further in that Facebook thread:
It would be valuable if we could get the courts to say that it was largely politics and partisan interests that have prevented the adoption of electoral reform. If the courts say that then that would be a reason for them NOT to give the decision on electoral reform to the government in power.
If the courts do rule that the existing electoral system needs to be overhauled, then to develop a new system… “some sort of independent process is required and there needs to be a way to ensure that independence, based on multi-party or all-party support.” “So, [it should be] either a Citizens Assembly or some other form of citizen-based process that is unassailable.”