Quebec re-opens file on proportional representation

Thanks to Amir Khadir, sole MNA for Quebec Solidaire, after almost two years of silence the Quebec government has agreed to re-open the matter of proportional representation in Quebec's National Assembly.

In a debate last Wednesday [1], Henri-François Gautrin, 66, Deputy House Leader of the Government and MNA from Verdun since 1989 (and leader of the Quebec NDP from 1973 to 1979) said the government remained committed to proportional representaton but "the how" remained the problem. "We have resumed the debate, the issue is not dead, the issue is evolving, the question is before us, the issue moves forward." He pleaded with Khadir to accept an amendment to his motion that the government could vote for, Khadir did so, and the motion pased unanimously.

There has been a hiatus because of the period of minority government. In 2006, from Jan 24 to March, a special committee of the Natonal Assembly, sitting jointly with a Citizens' Committee, visited 14 regions, received a total of 515 submissions, and recommended that the draft bill for proportional representation be improved. There were two possible models; the Citizens' Committee drafted one, the Special Committee said there was also another model and they could not decide between the two. Both were mixed compensatory models (MMP we say in English). The government referred the question of model design to the Chief Elections Officer, who spent a year doing a masterful study tabled in December 2007. After which, silence.

For several elections all three parties have supported PR. As the Minister Responsible for Reform of Democratic Institutions said Wednesday "The principle, everyone can agree on the principle, the problem is the how. How to put it in place so that it works, so that people understand, so that we get a correct equal representation of "the regions" and of urban areas, and of different communities, to ensure that our electoral law will meet our objectives."

After the Liberals regained their majority, I've been waiting to see what they would do. So has Amir Khadir, until last week he moved a motion: "The National Assembly requires the Government of Quebec to include in its proposed reform of the Elections Act a proportional voting system complying with the election commitments of all parties represented in the National Assembly in favour of a fair representation of political pluralism."

In a lenghty debate, the Minister said "if someone is willing to drop me off, this afternoon, the perfect model, with the arrangements, perfect measures to implement the proportional system, and let us foresee exactly the participation rate, then people will understand that there are questions about the representation of people from a territory, representation of citizens versus representation of a region, if elected by a compensatory proportional, these elements are not there yet, we believe, clear enough for us to make that decision today. . . I sincerely believe that at this time there is an element of urgency on the electoral map, in the financing of political parties. We are ready to move on these elements, but unfortunately for my colleague from Mercier (M. Khadir), on reforming the electoral system, we calculate that the work is not advanced enough, that consensus is not clear enough and sophisticated enough to enable us to move forward immediately with this proposal."

The spokeswoman for the ADQ had a good line: "I call this kind of topic "Road Runner topics:" we thought the Coyote was dead, but he never died, then it always starts over again. Well, this subject is one that comes back all the time like that. . . The ADQ has, and has always had, in our program, a reform of the voting system that takes better account of the democratic choices of Quebec voters. We've always wanted this kind of change, a more just and equitable representation of all currents of thought, that the current rules discriminate against. . . For all these reasons and especially so that the voters actually see their choices represented accurately in the National Assembly, we will support the method of proportional representation."

But it was Gautrin, a long-time PR supporter, who provided the drama, after sincerely thanking Khadir for moving the motion:

"So I'll say that, me personally, I think ... and I have defended this in our body politic, on our side ... we must achieve a form of representation, one day, that takes into account the different political currents. And I recognize, now, the political current that the member for Mercier represents, and I am pleased that this political current could be here today because a concentration of local people were found who shared this political current, which allowed him to come sit in the National Assembly.

But this political current existed much earlier than when he reached the National Assembly. I imagine that the member for Mercier will not criticize me too much if I say ... What I call the progressive left of Quebec was not present here, in this debate, when we had our debates, and this current had not the opportunity to speak, a current that he now expresses very, very precisely.

I wish myself that I would not completely extinguish this debate. . . We want a proportional voting system, we must specify which method of proportional representation we put forward, but we must be able also to have carefully analyzed the potentially perverse effects of a proportional voting system.

We have resumed the debate, the issue is not dead, the issue is evolving, the question is before us, the issue moves forward. But today, let's say that in the bill which will be tabled in the coming weeks, to include it right away without specifying which mode, we can not do it and we are really at a dead end.

In that sense, I wish and I really plead that we not bury the debate. I really plead not to bury the debate, and I remind the member for Mercier of his sense of logic. . . in his proposal, there are really two ideas. An idea which is a general principle we support, a general principle on which we agree, and a way to apply this general principle which he does not detail and on which there is no consensus, not on the fact that it uses a form of proportionality, understand me well, and the minister said it, there is no divergence at the moment on using a proportional system, but we can not say what type of proportional system will be put forward.

In that sense, I suggest and I implore the member for Mercier, not to bury it and have something that is alive, that will let us say: This debate is not dead, this debate is not closed, but it remains ... there are principles on which we are committed."

"If he agrees, we would not bury the whole debate. I think our party would be able to vote for that sentence and say: "That the National Assembly requests the Government of Quebec to take account in its proposed reform of the Elections Act the commitments of all political parties ..." And remember: there are commitments from the political parties. All political parties have already taken a position for a form of proportional representation, but all political parties have not yet determined the "how," have not determined what kind of proportional. So to say that "in its proposed reform of the Elections Act the commitments of all political parties represented in the National Assembly". And the end for me is absolutely important "... to ensure fair representation of political pluralism."

Allow me to suggest to my colleague the member for Mercier perhaps to accept this way of reopening the debate. We will continue the discussion, we will be able to move forward. I ask my colleague the member for Mercier to accept this wording, which would allow us, on our side here, to vote yes. And I explained why we are otherwise obliged to vote against."

". . if the past is any indication of anything, until now, successive governments for 33 years have failed in their campaign promises. However, as this is the first time that Québec Solidaire, the National Assembly ... it's my first motion on this, supported in this by the ADQ, supported in this by the Green Party, supported in this by a broad citizens' movement, I agree to test one last time the good faith of the government on this, taking into account the fact that in the amendment proposed by the government, they say that the Quebec government, that is to say, the minister responsible would be required to take into account in his proposed reform the commitments of all political parties represented in the National Assembly.

Now, the head of the present government, the last time he looked at it, took a public stand, March 14, 2006, in his inaugural speech, he said he will proceed with reforming the voting system. He said we need "a new voting system including procedures for proportional representation [enabling] the National Assembly to better reflect the will expressed by our citizens in elections. As part of our commitments, we will complete this fundamental reform for the future of democracy in Quebec."

So for me, the commitment referred to the government's amendment proposed to me, that I'll accept, is that commitment, that is to say, a new voting system including procedures for proportional representation and allowing the National Assembly therefore to have such a voting system."

Comments

Submitted by Wilf Day on November 18, 2009 - 12:00am.

Proportional representation: a step forward

Quote:

The member for Mercier Amir Khadir sees as auspicious the unanimous vote in the National Assembly for his motion on the proportional voting system, proof he says that a political consensus exists.

He said that by voting for this motion, the Charest government has a last chance to demonstrate whether or not it is in good faith on this issue.

Dr Khadir said the Liberal government had therefore promised that the reform of the electoral law announced by the Minister Bechard will take into account the commitments of all parties.

Reaction of Movement for a New Democracy (MDN) to the motion of November 12, 2009 [4]

Quote:

"Ensuring a fair representation of political pluralism:" a unanimous motion on a matter of consensus. The Political parties must act by proposing a new voting system.

The Movement for a New Democracy is pleased to have heard the four political parties represented in the National Assembly express their desire to complete the reform of the voting system. After several years of silence and inaction by governments, the issue has been addressed through a motion by the member for Quebec Solidaire, Mr. Amir Khadir.

The motion passed November 12, asked that the bill, scheduled for the coming weeks on the electoral map and the financing of political parties, reflect "the commitment of all political parties represented in the National Assembly to ensure fair representation of political pluralism. "Since this motion was adopted unanimously, the Movement for a New Democracy calls upon all political parties to present, before the end of the session in June 2010, a bill in line with the democratic expectations of the population and the consensus shown by the numerous consultations on the subject, by proposing a new voting system.

"As important as they are, neither the electoral map or the rules of financing of political parties can by themselves "ensure a fair representation of political pluralism." Therefore, Minister Bechard has no other choice but to include the voting system in the bill being prepared, in order to respect the motion passed" underlines Mercedez Roberge, President of the New Democracy Movement.

"It is by the mechanism of turning votes into seats, the voting system, that a society can put into practice this fundamental aspect of a healthy democracy. The reform of the voting system is just as urgent as revision of the rules for financing political parties" adds Ms. Roberge. Indeed, the work to be done between the adoption of a statute and the first use of a new voting mechanism, requires a bill be filed by June 2010 in order that, in the next election, expected in the Spring of 2013, Quebec will no longer use a voting system found deficient by many studies. The need to establish a voting system to proportional purpose once again was recognized Wednesday at the National Assembly, this time by the Government House Leader, Mr. Henri-François Gautrin who said "there is no disagreement on using a proportional system."

Following the debates surrounding the adoption of the motion, the MDN is dismayed that the consensus, repeatedly expressed by the public about the need to replace the current voting system by a form of proportional model, could still be questioned.

The statement of (PQ spokesman) Mr. Bechard arguing that "the consensus is not clear and sophisticated enough" is all the more surprising that several consensus points were expressed in the framework of the Special Commission on the Electoral Act (SCEA) in 2006 and their relevance has been validated in the report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec (2008). As examples of such consensus, let's remember that over 86% of submissions to the SCEA rejected the status quo and argued the need to improve the draft law introduced in 2004, 96% said that a mixed compensatory model should include two votes, 82% recognized the need to reflect the popular will expressed at the level of Quebec, by opting for a national compensation, and a consensus has been established on the need to adopt measures to promote representation equal women and men (72%).

"In 2006, the Parliamentary report concluding the work of SCEA recommended that "the current voting system in Quebec . . be reformed and modernized" a message summarizing the States-General held three years earlier as well as all consultations held in the past 30 years. We invite members of the National Assembly to read the many reports. They will see they have everything in hand to act and to present a coherent bill proposing a precise model" concluded the President of the Movement for New Democracy.

MDN is a nonpartisan citizens' movement which seeks that Quebec have a voting system respecting the will of the people, allowing equal representation between women and men, embodying the ethnocultural diversity of Quebec and its political pluralism, and assigning a proper place for the regions. Its role is to help people evaluate the proposals in the light of these results.

Submitted by Wilf Day on November 18, 2009 - 8:23am.

As noted above, the government referred the question of model design to the Chief Elections Officer, who spent a year doing a masterful study tabled in December 2007.

Here's the full report, 260 pages, in French.

Here's the 18-page summary, in English. [6]

Here's the 18-page summary, in French. [7]

Here's the technical appendix, 150 pages, in French [8].

Submitted by Brian White on November 18, 2009 - 12:52pm.

From reading the text above, it looks like the politicians are putting off pro rep until they find the perfect system.

(Which is funny, seeing as they are politicians and horse trading is their way of life.)

Well, as we know, perfection does not exist in this world.

Is there any way to make them just get on with it?

I doubt that anyone would do a referendum with a "Supermajority" in quebec for fear of civil war there but who knows?

It all is a game for them.

Brian

Submitted by Fidel on November 18, 2009 - 6:44pm.

Brian White wrote:

I doubt that anyone would do a referendum with a "Supermajority" in quebec for fear of civil war there but who knows?

Isn't the rule 50% +1 for referenda in PQ? If 50+1 is good enough to decide breaking up the country, it should be good enough for choosing a more democratic electoral system, too.

Submitted by Wilf Day on November 28, 2009 - 4:51pm.

Charest avoids McGuinty’s mistake

When Dalton McGuinty began Ontario’s democratic renewal process in 2004, Liberal MPPs generally wanted to restore the size of the House to the 130 MPPs it had before 1999. They said things like “there aren’t enough backbenchers to properly staff the committees and maintain democratic oversight over government operations and regulations.”

And they also had a big problem in the North. Population growth in recent decades had been concentrated in high-growth areas like Peel Region and York Region, while the North stagnated. In 2003, the North stood to lose three of its 11 MPPs, but the federal Boundaries Commission had let them keep two extra. Still, at the 2004 federal election, the North was to lose an MP. At the next Ontario election after 2003, the North was to lose an MPP. The North was in an uproar.

McGuinty’s Liberals had promised to let the North keep that seat, and they kept that promise. But as the Conservative opposition critic Norm Sterling said when that legislation was being passed:

“Our Constitution, under section 3, has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada to say that you can't give more electoral power to one segment of our population than others. . . The problem with this proposal is that only one riding in the north falls within the 25% quotient. . . if you're going to have 11 ridings in the north, you're probably going to have to have, not 96, but 105, or maybe even 110, in the south.”

The Liberals knew he was right. But instead of raising the number of MPPs, they threw that issue to the Citizens’ Assembly, who recommended increasing the House to 129 MPPs as part of the Mixed Member Proportional system. Then the Ontario Liberals let that proposition hang out to dry.

Quebec has the same problem, and even worse: population growth has been concentrated in the Montreal suburbs. Three no-growth regions of Quebec stand to lose seats if the number is kept at 125. Without an increase, the ridings of Gaspé, Kamouraska-Témiscouata and Beauce-Nord would have been scrapped.

Rather than tie an increase in the 125 MNAs to electoral reform, they have just introduced a bill to make the Representation Commission increase the number of MNAs in order to keep no-growth areas from losing MNAs. Bill 78 would protect the four ridings of Bas-St-Laurent, the three of Gaspésie, and the eight in Chaudière-Appalaches, as well as all the other regions, totalling 123 seats. As well, three exceptional ridings are spelled out: Îles-de-la-Madeleine, Ungava and Nunavik.

The provincial quotient is determined by dividing the population of the 123 normal ridings by 123; then, any region with a shortfall is given more seats. The Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions says this will result in two to six more seats, for a total of 128 to 132. I make it seven more, total 133. Very reasonable.

Then electoral reform can be dealt with as a separate issue.

Submitted by Wilf Day on December 22, 2009 - 10:39pm.

What would Quebec’s National Assembly look like with a proportional voting system? And based on the new electoral map?

With the new map, the model of regional calculation works better than many had feared. The model of Quebec-wide calculation works much worse than I had expected.