Evidence of meeting #10 for Electoral Reform in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was parties.
A video is available from Parliament.
10:10 a.m.
Prof. André Blais
On exactly the same question...?
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
10:10 a.m.
Prof. André Blais
On polarization first, I guess?
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Yes, polarization, confrontation; that's right.
10:10 a.m.
Prof. André Blais
I don't think the evidence is that clear on exactly what the consequence would be. Well, there would be a consequence in that there would be a wider array of viewpoints, and some of them would probably be more extremist than they are now, so there will be more diversity but also perhaps a little bit more polarization at the beginning in the House of Commons.
And then, as Professor Milner has mentioned, of course a coalition government would probably have to be formed and then there would have to be compromise between these positions. Some people think this instills a spirit of compromise among politicians. I'm not that convinced about that.
Certainly, I think people recognize the necessity of compromise, but each of the parties in a coalition government still has its own interests, and they will of course learn to make bargains, and so on. I am not convinced that there would be a lot more spirit of compromise, but there would be more practice of compromise.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Maybe I'll wait and ask Mr. Himelfarb at a different time.
July 27th, 2016 / 10:10 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Milner, we've heard testimony from some witnesses arguing this question of phrasing about whether votes count or not. I think some of our witnesses who are opposed to electoral reform have said that every vote is counted, but I suggest that not every vote counts.
Is that a fair comment under first past the post?
10:15 a.m.
Senior Researcher, Chair in Electoral Studies, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Well, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
It's the impact. Is every vote treated equally? Is the impact of every vote cast in first past the post elections, as we have here in Canada, equal in its weight on the outcome?
10:15 a.m.
Senior Researcher, Chair in Electoral Studies, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Again, it all depends on what you mean by the words. What I said, I think, is pretty clear. The more proportional the system is, the more equal every vote is in terms of its ability to get somebody elected. So the less proportional a system is, the less equal each vote is in terms of its effect on getting somebody elected.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Right. So that equality of vote question.... I'll put this to you and Mr. Himelfarb. Another witness talked about what happens with regionalization. We've had regionalization in this country recently and all through our history. We've had examples, such as the Reform Party, which was highly regionalized, coming out of the west, and the Bloc Québécois for obvious reasons, regionalized within Quebec. The suggestion has been that to go to a proportional system would diminish that regionalization, which is important in a country like Canada. As big and diverse as we are, in government and opposition, you'd have representation from all regions as much as possible. Is there something that we can hope for and expect under proportional systems?
10:15 a.m.
Senior Researcher, Chair in Electoral Studies, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
I'd like André as well to address this.
I saw that mentioned in the evidence of earlier meetings here, and it was the first time I'd heard that suggestion. I don't know where it comes from. It certainly never happened in New Zealand or Scotland. I don't quite understand why. It does seem to me that our experience in Canada under the current system is that if we have a region where one party is strong, the system exaggerates that, while a proportional system would gives each party exactly what it deserves in each region.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Let's take this in the reverse example—and I do want to hear from Mr. Blais and Mr. Himelfarb on this.
I can remember a recent Conservative government essentially being shut out of a region of Montreal entirely. They did a workaround. Mr. Harper appointed somebody to the Senate and then to the cabinet, from Montreal, to have some Montreal representation. Under a proportional system, would such an undemocratic workaround even be necessary? Would not the Conservatives likely elect somebody from places like Montreal or Toronto, major cities that should be represented in the government?
10:15 a.m.
Senior Researcher, Chair in Electoral Studies, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
As I said, I've never understood where that argument was coming from.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Okay.
Mr. Blais, did you have a comment on this?
Mr. Himelfarb as well?
10:15 a.m.
Prof. André Blais
I guess so. The existing system under-represents very small regional parties and overrepresents big regional parties. That's why the Bloc at times were overrepresented and at other times under-represented. The existing system is not biased in any way, I think, in general for or against regional parties. PR would not change that.
What would change that, I think, as you mentioned, is that the Liberals, for instance, would much more easily elect some MPs under PR in Alberta. So the differences in representation of different regions within parties would be smaller.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
We need to always reverse this away from the perspective of the parties to the perspective of the voter, to the Conservative voter in downtown Toronto, to the Liberal voter on Vancouver Island, to the New Democrat on the east coast. Having their views, their values, represented in both government and opposition is a valued thing, which proportionality allows you.
Mr. Himelfarb.
10:15 a.m.
Clerk of the Privy Council, 2002-2006, As an Individual
I'll take a practical perspective. Concretely, when, for example, the national energy policy was passed by a Liberal majority government, there were no Alberta voices in that government—zero.
10:15 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
There was no voice out of Alberta when an energy question surrounding the question of oil and gas was being debated, discussed, and then passed?
10:15 a.m.
Clerk of the Privy Council, 2002-2006, As an Individual
In any proportional system you would imagine, that would not have been the case. Whatever you think of the policy, one could well speculate it might have been different, with strong voices from other regions.
10:15 a.m.
Clerk of the Privy Council, 2002-2006, As an Individual
That's not the only region that has been shut out or limited to very few voices that would be enhanced in a proportional system. I'm not talking about regional parties versus national parties; I'm talking about actual voices representing regions at the table.
