Evidence of meeting #8 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 governments.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Peter Russell  Professor Emeritus, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Patrice Dutil  Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I'm not blaming the system.

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

You're blaming the system. You're saying—

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Not at all. I'm asking, is there not a correlation—?

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

—that another system yields naturally more women. It doesn't, and I'll point you to another example.

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

I can't even follow now. Why don't we let Mr. Dutil answer, and then you can have a supplementary?

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll simply say that in Ontario there has been a dramatic increase in the number of female MPs, and that's been done under a first past the post system. If the parties are serious about making sure that women are well represented, then they should run more women as candidates.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I cited evidence that there's a correlation, it seems, at least on the surface; that under proportional systems women do better. You agreed with that statement, is that not true?

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

It's coincidence; it's not causal.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

It's coincidence? It's only coincidence that the vast majority of countries that succeed in having better women representation also are countries that have proportional systems? That's just coincidence; that's not evidence?

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

It's coincidence.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Right.

4 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

Run more women as candidates.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

There was a question earlier about representing the will of voters.

This is a question to you, Professor Russell. This one comes from Twitter, from Jennifer Ross, who asks, “do you think a referendum could be held after the voters have tried... out” and understand what the new system is? You've talked about not so much a convention as validating the process that we are engaged in right now, by hearing the democratic voice of Canadians through a referendum.

4 p.m.

Prof. Peter Russell

I would not go for a trial run. I really would go into town halls and other places for simulations. I think one of the best ways of getting people who haven't really thought much about these alternatives to do so is to have simulations. It's the best way of teaching.

I've experienced this. When you stand up and tell people, even though you have very clear language, what STV or some other system is, it goes in one ear and out the other.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Sure.

4 p.m.

Prof. Peter Russell

If you take a Saturday afternoon off and have a couple of votes, one under one system and one under the other, not only do they learn something, but they have a lot of fun. Do that; have simulations.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

What we're trying to overcome is that barrier of fear of the unknown, or the fear of change—

4 p.m.

Prof. Peter Russell

Sure.

4 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

—which is a natural precept.

It was something about the outcomes again. I think we need to return to this, because all we talk about here in terms of the mechanism, and I think in terms of understandability for Canadians, is what kind of results they are going to see.

My Conservative colleague earlier was attempting again to make a vice out of cooperation and coalitions and whatnot, which is strange, because Mr. Harper in 2004 attempted to make what he didn't call a coalition government but a “co-opposition” government. He used that different term when he sat down with Mr Duceppe and Mr. Layton to try to oust the minority Liberal government. I remember it well. I was here.

What's valid when it's introduced by one party becomes invalid. I think we need to make a virtue out of the idea of parties sharing ideas and sharing power.

Is this not something that we should encourage?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Unfortunately, our five minutes is up. Perhaps we could save the answer for another questioner.

We'll go to Mr. Thériault.

4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

So much to say! You're quite inspiring, gentlemen.

A number of people have raised the issue of regional voting or regionalism. I wonder a lot about that. Some claim that the current system leads to regional aberrations such as what happened in 1993 and that a proportional representation system is necessary because of that. I can come back to that. Others argue that a mixed member proportional system, or compensatory mixed system, would promote regional voting.

What do you think?

Since we have only five minutes and I have another element I'd like to discuss, I'd appreciate a short answer.

4:05 p.m.

Professor, Ryerson University, As an Individual

Prof. Patrice Dutil

Experience shows us that, under a proportional representation system, a growing number of parties will represent narrower and narrower interests. It's as simple as that, and the math backs it up.

4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Where do you stand, Professor Russell?

4:05 p.m.

Prof. Peter Russell

I don't think it will; I think the opposite. I think it will encourage parties to be national.

Right now it's tempting for parties that run consistently second or third and don't get any representation in the House of Commons to focus just on the region in which they have strength. That has always been a temptation. Fortunately, the Conservatives have resisted that temptation and have worked hard—in Quebec, for instance—to make themselves a national party. It's the same with the Liberals, who almost got locked out of the west for a while.

I think a PR system would really encourage national parties. The threshold level is very important. When you're taking your evidence in on other systems—we talked about the low threshold in the Israeli PR system—you should consider that, and you should look at the evidence of the proliferation of parties: it's not there. It should be evidence-driven.

There are not big proliferations of regional parties in the countries that have adopted PR, and first past the post countries have even more. That point has been made.

4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

My apologies for interrupting, but that wasn't the point I wanted to discuss.