Reform of democratic institutions: a three-pronged project.

• Author: Dupuis, Jacques P.

This article looks at previous attempts to reform the Quebec electoral system and the plans of the new government elected in 2003.

**********

The debate on changes to the electoral system is not new. In the 1966 election, the now defunct Union nationale won a majority of seats, although the Liberal Party of Jean Lesage received more votes. This situation was a repeat of what had occurred in 1944. In the interim, the debate had focussed rapidly on the need to correct the distortions occasioned by the electoral map and on the possibility of changing voting procedures. In 1970, the government of the late Robert Bourassa set to work to redraw the electoral map. However, on the issue of the electoral system itself, Mr. Bourassa made it known in the 1970 leadership race that he opposed a review of voting procedures that could lead to a proportional system. He firmly believed that our first-past-the-post voting procedure, made it possible to form a government with a sufficiently large parliamentary majority to govern with assurance and legitimacy and that this fact was the main virtue of our electoral process. He would retain this view of the electoral system throughout his career. The PQ Government elected in 1976 expressed an interest in changing voting procedures. Accordingly, in the late 1970s, it published a green paper under the responsibility of the minister at the time, Robert Burns.

Faced with resistance, especially from elected officials--members of the government and the Liberal opposition alike--the government dropped its initial plan and asked the Representation Commission to undertake consultations and to propose a new plan to elected officials. The model of regional proportional voting proposed at the time was not supported by either experts or elected officials. The latter, for example, thought it would break the direct link between voter and elected representative, something we continue to consider important today. Furthermore, consultation at the time revealed no real popular support for change. The election in 1998 was a repeat of earlier ones in 1944 and 1966 in which the Liberals failed to obtain a majority of seats, despite receiving the most votes. The Action democratique du Quebec was also under-represented. This helped revive interest in a review of voting procedures. This time, however, the interest was echoed not only in the political and academic milieus, but in society as well. At the instigation of the Mouvement pour une democratie nouvelle, the issue has remained on the agenda of all the political parties. The movement has rallied people from all walks around the key idea of proposing changes to voting procedures in order to have the makeup of the National Assembly accurately reflect the will of the people and so that the government drawn from it may be more in keeping with the way the public voted. This represents a marked change in public opinion from the 1970s and 1980s.

The initiatives of the Mouvement pour une democratie nouvelle are complemented by debate within the political parties, partial consultations by the Commission des institutions sur la revision du mode de scrutin, the study paper prepared by my predecessor in the previous government, Jean-Pierre Charbonneau, and the Estates General on the Reform of Democratic Institutions. All of these are helping the government to take account of a real desire for change and to set parameters for the guidelines we intend to propose as part of the institutional reform the premier announced for the spring 2004 session. The government has therefore the legitimacy necessary to move the debate along--not starting it all over again, but redefining it in terms of the objectives that reflect both its priorities and its philosophy of action. The plan we propose and will submit to public scrutiny will be relevant first and foremost and will echo our political traditions. It will be realistic and feasible--the hallmark of our government.

So that we may formulate the terms of the plan, which is currently in preparation, we must respond in very clear terms to three questions.

Why change our democratic institutions?

The foundations of our democracy are solid and well tested. Anyone can be a member of a political party. If they want to be active they may do so without fear for their safety or that of their family. Elected Members may exercise their mandate without fearing undue...