Electoral Reform Committee on July 26th, 2016

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Chair, and my thanks to both of you for taking the time to join us from Dublin.

Professor Gallagher, I understand you've written about referendums in Ireland. I understand there have been at least a couple of dozen, typically on proposed constitutional amendments. Is that more or less accurate?

[Michael Gallagher]

Yes, we've had more than 30 referendums. Every change to the constitution needs a referendum in Ireland.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

As I understand it, the current constitution was approved by a referendum. Was it in 1932?

[Michael Gallagher]

It was 1937.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Is the election law enshrined in the constitution, or is it a normal statute adopted by the Dáil Éireann?

[Michael Gallagher]

PR by single transferable vote is in the constitution. The minimum number of MPs for a constituency is three, and that's in the constitution. Many of the other details, however, are laid out in law.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Am I correct that there have been a couple of referendums in Ireland on proposed constitutional amendments to modify the electoral system? I believe that in 1958 and 1968 there were failed referendums to move to a first past the post system, a Westminster system. Is that correct?

[Michael Gallagher]

That's right, yes. The first one was lost only very narrowly, but the second one lost pretty heavily.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

So in the fifties and sixties there was some movement. Where did this come from? Did the idea of moving back to the Westminster system come from the Dáil or from the general public?

[Michael Gallagher]

It came, I'm afraid, almost entirely from political motivation. The biggest party in the country, Fianna Fáil, which had done pretty well and usually won a majority, saw its future as being a bit less rosy than its past had been and thought that in order to guarantee winning a majority in future elections, they would do better under a system of first past the post. It was an almost entirely politically motivated referendum on both sides.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

In those two referendums in 1958 and 1968, the public voted to retain the single transferable vote system. Is that correct?

[Michael Gallagher]

That's right.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Broadly speaking, what has been the Irish experience with referendums? Canada has a limited experience. We've had only a couple, and they were of a plebiscitory nature, an advisory nature, technically speaking. Has the Irish experience generally been a positive one?

[Michael Gallagher]

I would say so. People are accustomed to referendums these days. We have four or five every decade, and it seems right and proper that big issues should be put to a referendum. We have a special commission set up to inform the public about the arguments on each side, and this commission gets a mixed reception as to how well it's doing its job.

Perhaps I should ask my colleague to comment on that, since he's studied referendum voting.

[Michael Marsh]

I'd probably disagree with my colleague that it's been a positive experience. I think most of the research we have on referendums—and there are some exceptions—suggests that people were unclear about what they were voting for and unclear about the consequences. I think the most recent British referendum was a classic case of that.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Just to be clear, if Ireland were to consider changing its electoral system today, it would require a constitutional amendment authorized by a majority of voters in a referendum.

[Michael Marsh]

Yes.

[Michael Gallagher]

Exactly.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Not only is that a constitutional requirement, but am I correct in inferring that there would be public expectation that it would be the case?

[Michael Gallagher]

Yes, I would say so.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Romanado.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much to both of you for being here with us today. It was very helpful for me to see the ballot, as my colleague said, and to get a better understanding of how things work.

To go back to what my colleague Ruby was talking a little bit about, do multi-member seats create a certain level of regional tension and volatility within parties? As I'm sure you're aware, often if constituents are not happy with one answer, they might go to another representative to see if they can get a better response. Could you elaborate a little on that and how it would work?

[Michael Marsh]

We see that here, and people will often contact more than one TD, one MP, to try to resolve their problems, and since a lot of that now takes place by email rather than by tramping along to a local constituency office, it's fairly easy to blind-copy all the TDs in the constituency into your request. I think TDs know that this request may have gone to another one, so they'd better deal with it.

There is competition both within and between parties to be seen as a good member of Parliament.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Would this not also decrease efficiencies in terms of duplication of efforts? For instance, if a constituent was not happy with respect to a case file and contacted multiple TDs, and multiple TDs started putting resources towards solving the issue, and, God forbid, there might be actually two different outcomes for the file, could you explain how this could be efficient?