John Lorinc's essay at Spacing Toronto is a must-read.
If the federal Liberals have endured anything even faintly resembling a controversy so far in these early halcyon days of their majority, it occurred over the holidays, with some punditry ping-pong on the question of whether the government should hold a referendum on electoral reform, and specifically Justin Trudeau’s pledge to move to a post-first-past-the-post democracy. The prime minister’s non-whip whip, Dominic LeBlanc, roundly rejected calls for a plebiscite, and the government is promising legislation by the spring of 2017.
There’s a good reason why this little seasonal food fight made your head hurt. While the Liberals’ patronage of the electoral reform cause seems like a step forward, I still find it difficult to tease apart the government’s stated interest in this subject and the way their positioning generated a political dividend during the election, delivering those voters who are very invested in this issue.
How many voters is hard to say. After all, the election also produced a crisp and cathartic outcome, with strong voter turnout (68.5%). Trudeau, in turn, appointed a highly representative cabinet. And two months on, the polls continue to suggest that Canadians are evidently supportive of the early days direction. It all looks like evidence of a system that worked in spite of its flaws.
Two or three years hence, when the Liberals get around to tabling reforms, the bloom will have come off the Trudeau rose and they’ll have less political incentive — plus a track record that will almost certainly include mistakes, reversals, and even a scandal or two — to make changes that could impair their re-election prospects.
My fervent hope is that the Liberals, and Democratic Institutions minister Maryam Monsef, don’t get so tangled up in the partisan debate over changing the way voting works that they fail to deliver on other important reform pledges, such as online ballots and other voting options designed to increase turnout.