William D. Marriott is a retired economist who specialized in public policy analysis of the oil and gas industryCanada is indeed broken. Fixing our democratic foundations might be a good first repair.When Justin Trudeau unveiled the Liberal policy platform in 2015 he promised (p.27) to “make every vote count” and “2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system”. (Further “the Senate needs to change. We need to end the partisan nature of the Senate.” (p. 29) Guess the joke was on us as he plans to stack the Senate with more Liberals before he finally leaves.)But the first-past-the post promise got a lot of traction in the campaign as Canadians examined their electoral system. Unfortunately the public debate after the election revealed that the first-past-the-post was the least of the weaknesses of Canada’s democratic foundation. Ultimately, the Liberals dropped any reforms as it was clear that the Liberals would be disadvantaged by even the smallest of changes.It is now time for Canadians to have this debate once again and in an ironic turn of events it would be the Conservatives stealing an idea from the Liberals.Abraham Lincoln’s famous definition — “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” is the very heart of most Western democratic ideals. Yet in Canada we operate a second-rate version and pretend not to notice that it has real implications to our quality of life. Now is a great time to fix it.This past weekend Pierre Poilievre was busy trying to pivot his election message to take advantage of a recent ground swell in national patriotism. He was also trying to deal with the rising threat of a virtually unknown unelected bureaucrat, not merely becoming the next prime minister, but also winning [highly unlikely] a possible March 10th election call. Such are the vagaries of politics. But, some of the foundational challenges facing Canada remain unchanged and will require significant political will to be addressed. Maybe now is the time to temper the focus on the increasingly boring orange-threat-of-the-day with some other less emotionally charged platform issues.The most important of these is democratic reform.The recent US election and the first few weeks of the new administration highlight some of the great differences between US and Canadian democracy. While not advocating for a US-style political transformation, it is hard not to admire some of the features of US democracy that are missing in Canada.The first is all the “checks and balances” designed to limit the power of individuals, political parties, and government institutions. The architects of the US version of democracy were highly suspicious of government and took extra steps to protect citizens from its potential evils. Even then, the first two amendments to the US constitution further solidified the primacy of the individual against the power of the state.In the US, the leader of the country is directly elected by the people after first succeeding in getting the nomination to run for leader, by being elected over other individuals in the primary process. In Canada, the leader of the country is selected by a small group of voters who sign up as members of a political party. In the US, a president can be “fired” through the impeachment process whereas in Canada an unsuccessful and unpopular leader can continue to govern even after being “fired” by an informal caucus revolt.MP Michael Chong’s Reform Act 2014 was an attempt to give more power to elected House members to balance the power of the prime minister. However, the Act left it up to the individual parties to utilize their new powers. The Conservatives did so and used it to replace Erin O’Toole. But the Liberals didn’t avail themselves of it and so we are stuck with our current prime minister. Finally, a US president can only serve two, four-year terms whereas in Canada a party leader has no time limits at all. William Lyon Mackenzie King was prime minister for more than 21 years.Second, the US cabinet which acts as the official advisory body to the president goes through a rigorous confirmation process including hearings in front of the US Senate. These people need not be and frequently are not elected members of the two law-making institutions the House of Representatives and the Senate. In Canada, the cabinet is invariably chosen by the prime minister from sitting MPs of the governing party and usually with a quid pro quo of loyalty to the prime minister’s priorities. Witness all the current Liberal candidates and cabinet members abandoning the unpopular and failing policies of the last 9 years of Liberal government.Third, the US law-making body is comprised of two institutions, the House and the Senate, each of which acts as check on the power of the other. All of the members are elected, the House every two years and the Senate every six years. Thus, one third of the Senate turns over every two years. Every state in the union has an equal number of senators , so it is impossible for high-population states such as California to dominate policy by virtue of having a large proportion of members in the house. In Canada, the Senate is promoted as a “house of sober second thought" rather than a check on the power of the Commons. And of course, rather than each province having an equal number of senators there are some provinces that are more equal than others. Canadian senators are appointed by the prime minister often for bizarre political messaging. For example after Danielle Smith announced policies protecting youth from transgender surgeries and protecting female athletes, Justin Trudeau announced a transgender activist as a Senator for Alberta, despite there being elected Alberta senators-in-waiting.All of these weaknesses in the foundation of our system lead to a situation where the prime minister in Canada has immense operational power, much more than the president in the US. And while Canadians focussed their recent wrath on the person of Justin Trudeau, it was these underlying structural weaknesses that allowed his unpopular reign to thrive and continue.One cornerstone principle of democracy is “one person, one vote.” Seems pretty simple — but not in Canada. Under the Harper Fair Representation Act 2011 and the formula in our Constitution there will be five more seats added to the House for the coming election and is fixed for the next ten years, raising the total to 343. Using population estimates for 2021, Alberta will get 3 more seats with BC and ON getting 1 each. But does this give us “fair” one person, one vote representation?Based on 2024 population, BC and AB have nearly 1.5 million more people than QC and yet have only 2 more seats in the House. This yields a 13.3% premium for QC votes in the House. Stated another way, to get vote parity with QC, BC and AB would need to add another 11 seats in the House. It is even worse if we look at the Maritimes. AB has about 2.2 million more people than the combined population of NS, NB, NF and PE, but only has 5 more seats. This gives a 58.8 % premium for the Maritimes. If AB had voting parity with the Maritimes they would need an additional 22 seats (22 is not a typo!)Our democracy is indeed broken. Looking at our Senate we should be ashamed as it has become a partisan extension of the Liberal party, filled with Justin Trudeau/Gerald Butts(?) appointments that will try to give all sorts of grief to the new Conservative government. What in this dog’s breakfast could Pierre Poilievre possibly modify? First make a change to the Cabinet to give them more power and reduce the influence of the PMO. Second, refuse to appoint any new Senators unless they have been elected by provinces. Third, judiciously use omnibus bills to bring attention the corrupt nature of the current Senate. Fourth, revisit the notion of fair representation in the House and give more seats to the West. And fifth and most important, make sure all these options are known by the voters going into the next election. The choice should be clear: do you still want a Canada or not?Are you old enough to remember the motto of Preston Manning’s Reform Party? “The West Wants In” is nearly 40 years old and seems a bit quaint for these troubling political times. A recent survey by Research Co indicates that 38% of Albertans want out, not in. Canada should pay attention or our confederacy may be doomed.William D. Marriott is a retired economist who specialized in public policy analysis of the oil and gas industry.
