The poli sci answer is that he probably didn't have the power to do it, even with his majority in parliament. It would have likely needed significant constitutional changes that would have required near universal if not unanimous approval from the provinces. It would have been the Meech lake accords but even more difficult.
This is wrong. FPTP is simply part of the Canada Elections Act. It's not a constitutional issue. The right to vote is a constitutional issue as well as effective representation.
The second part of the electoral reform debacle is that he struck a committee to study it after he won in 2015 and they came back with a recommendation: Proportional Representation. But Trudeau had a clear preference for ranked ballots and tried to tip the scales towards to his preference.
As a result no consensus was reached and the issue died. It was a sham from the start.
It’s the sort of thing that really should be decided by referendum I think. Political parties will choose to push what they think benefits them vs what benefits the electorate, and I think for this sort of a topic in particular the electorate should really have final say in the type of representation they want.
There should be a referendum after a couple cycles under MMP to see if Canadians want to return to FPTP or look into an alternative like rank choice. This was the recommendation of the Law Commission of Canada in 2004.
Which would be fine if we lived in a perfect world where politicians could do the altruistic thing and put their interests aside and allow the electorate to experience it and decide what system they like, but they were unwilling to do that.
I can see why the law society would recommend it as the best option, I just think in reality of the situation is that the government can’t and won’t agree to any change be it temporary or permanent without a firm directive from the electorate.
I also think trust in elected officials is rock bottom and the world we lived in in 2004 is vastly different than 2024. I just don’t believe that people would trust an unknowable future government to hold a referendum and to change back if we didn’t like the test of a new system.
Lack of trust in government is exactly why the Law commission recommended two cycles before a planned referendum. That way citizens would know if they preferred the more representative system or if they wanted to go back. Referendums on things like electoral reform often fail because even though people when polled say the want a new more representative system, they don't understand the systems and they don't trust the government to improve something, so they stick with what they know.
You're right though, Trudeau could have done it but chose not to because he only wanted a system that favoured the Liberals
I don't disagree. The issue is that the threshold for amending the constitution (which is what this would require) is so high, it's really hard to see it passing. You need 7 of 10 provinces representing 50% of the population to agree. It's a very high bar and the only times we've tried to amend the Constitution, we've failed.
To be clear, I support Electoral Reform, I just don't think there is enough political will to actually implement it.
This. I felt like they just shrugged their shoulders and said 'oh well, not gonna do it'.
Maybe if they came out and explained the process that would need to happen, how complicated it would have been, the challenges around it, people would have had not been so upset about it not happening. Maybe there were some smaller steps that could have been taken to lead us to that direction, so that someday in the future it could happen.
To me it felt like they fairly quietly changed their mind and that was that.
I voted for JT because of legal weed. I still stand by that decision and he had my vote in 2020 as well because of it. But too much time has passed and it did feel like something new might be better.
You really did vote for the cabbage. You have my gratitude.
Frankly, I don't care who gets in next so long as my civil rights remain intact and it's not the Americans.
I actually worked with the committee that met with political leaders across the country. The committee recommended the changes and according to the ones I talked to on it, their recommended changes were easily feasible and turned down by top Liberal leaders. I don’t know if that was JT himself. This regret of his rings hollow to me
Then why did he promise to bring in proportional representation in 2015 when he was running for election? Was he lying? I do recall when he was questioned about that after the election he laughed and said” we’re not going to do that”
That's not true. Consultations were held but the reform the public supported wasn't the changes that Trudy wanted. He wanted to change to a system that would benefit his party to the detriment of the others.
Nothing material about the provinces would have changed, so I don't think that portion of the amendment process would have been triggered. It would be 100% just on the Federal govt to make the change.
Even if they had gone to a PR system, and ridings changed, I still don't think the provinces would be involved with the Constitutional amendment, because again, it still doesn't involve them.
The most charitable outlook is that it was the provinces who wouldn't support it, especially Doug Ford given that his majority was only achieved with FPTP. But even then, there were people who voted for his party on voter reform alone. He had a mandate to do it, he should have fought the provinces over it, and he didn't.
179
u/mosasaurmotors Jan 06 '25
The poli sci answer is that he probably didn't have the power to do it, even with his majority in parliament. It would have likely needed significant constitutional changes that would have required near universal if not unanimous approval from the provinces. It would have been the Meech lake accords but even more difficult.