Roundup: Is there a regional trade-off?

Posted on by

Canadian public affairs blog In Due Course published a piece on the weekend wherein Joseph Heath offers a few things to consider with how a Conservative party would deal with Quebec under a proportional representation system where the calculations are different. It’s interesting and he raises a lot of very good points. And predictably, proponents of PR went to question all of his points, particularly about the fortunes of the Bloc Québécois (and to a lesser extent the Reform Party) under the current first-past-the-post system.

The problem with cherry-picking individual election results like 1993 is that it doesn’t take a broader view of the system’s resilience as a whole. Over the longer term, regional parties in this country may do well for an election cycle or two at the most, but they have no capacity or room for growth, and that’s why the big-tent brokerage parties will always regain strength and power. What it also does is say that when these kinds of regional movements do take hold, that their grievances and desire to punish parties in power (which some Bloc votes have been about) is illegitimate.

Indeed, as Emmett Macfarlane points out here, focusing on geography misses the point when you look at how the big-tent parties are forced to craft policies that will appeal nationally and won’t explicitly write-off regions.

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/823255411595821056

Coyne is also dismissive of “safe” ridings or regions, but I’m sure that we’ve seen time and again that there is almost no such thing as a “safe” seat or riding, particularly when there are swings in the public mood. Again, that’s not a bad thing, and one could argue that in a properly functioning House of Commons, “safe” seats can be a bulwark against too much power in the leadership because MPs with “safe” seats that have no prospect of getting into cabinet are more likely to push back against what they see as intrusions by the leader because they have little to lose. (Granted, this is more keenly demonstrated in Westminster because their leaders don’t have the ability to sign off on nomination forms like they do here, and their leadership selection process has been different until recently, but the point still stands).

Part of the problem here, which Coyne does admit, is that defenders of different systems are approaching the issues in different ways. But defenders of the current system don’t necessarily foresee a future dystopia as warning that if you’re looking for changes to the electoral system to fix what is perceived to be broken here, you’re going to find that it’s not actually going to fix things, and it certainly won’t result in this kind of democratic utopianism that most PR advocates proclaim.

There is also the fact, and I cannot stress this enough, that Canada is not the same as most other countries. While we are not Israel in terms of its politics, we are also not a Scandinavian country either, so expecting their results to translate here is just as much of an over-reach and a fiction.

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/823256309755772929

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/823257579170172928

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/823257712351911937

That’s why we need to approach this very carefully. (Well, I say we need to smother the electoral reform consultations entirely, but that’s just me). Too many people are simply pointing to Norway or Sweden and saying “Look! See how great it is!” when they should also look at the vast dysfunction of Belgium (which is a far better analogy if you look at our systems and cultures), or even Australia, where their proportionally-elected Senate is an utter gong show. But cherry-picking data – on both sides – doesn’t actually help further the debate.

Good reads:

  • The cabinet is holding a retreat in Calgary, where dealing with the Trumpocalypse is top of mind. Here’s a look at those upcoming by-elections in the city.
  • Donald Trump says he’ll soon meet with Trudeau to talk about renegotiating NAFTA.
  • It looks like Canada is delaying any decision on peacekeeping operations until we have a better sense of American expectations on defence issues.
  • CATSA has new screening protocols for trans travellers, but the concern now is whether their staff are getting adequate training to implement them.
  • Canada is investigating whether education aid funds to Afghanistan were embezzled there.
  • On the Trumpocalypse files, here is a look at the insanity of being Trump’s spokesperson, with comments from previous Canadian press secretaries.
  • Charlie Angus has moved to the “second phase” of his leadership exploration with a website and search for volunteers.
  • Kevin O’Leary says he wants to introduce policies to ensure corporations reinvest capital in Canadian businesses.
  • Kathleen Wynne took to Facebook to pen an open letter to O’Leary in order to correct the record on some of the outrageous things he says about Ontario.
  • Aaron Wherry looks at O’Leary vs Trump when it comes to saying outrageous things, and what supporters take literally versus seriously.

Odds and ends:

The Liberals have nominated their candidate for the Calgary Midnapore by-election.

Here’s the story of that kid in New Brunswick that everyone memed after Trudeau’s town hall there, and it’s not what you might think.

3 thoughts on “Roundup: Is there a regional trade-off?”

  1. Just wanted to point out that the problem with the AUS Senate is not so much the voting system, but the fact that it is stupidly easy to start up new political parties. Consequently, anyone with a minor beef can start a party and end up with a seat or two. If they clamped down on that, they’d eliminate a lot of the gong-show parties and candidates.

  2. About the little boys reaction to Trudeau’s speech, I can understand a child in such a place, I too would have been bored to tears. The reaction on Twitter was different, many hostile anti-refugee remarks and again unfortunately coming from Alberta, the usual white red-neck haters.
    I would like to see the Press ask more about Canada’s strategy vis-a-vis Trump and NAFTA. We are going to hurt a lot in CDA with the coming changes and we should not be naive. For Trump, Canada is another Mexico, to many CDNs can’t see that because they drank the Kool-Aid of Friends and Neighbour nonsense. Will Rosie Barton ask about our strategy? Will Trudeau re-assure CDNs? Let’s hope so.

Comments are closed.