Round table on the process to be used for electoral reform.

• Author: Aucoin, Peter

In November 2004 the House of Commons adopted an amendment to the Throne Speech requiring the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to study and recommend a process that engages citizens and parliamentarians in an examination of the electoral system. In pursuit of this mandate the Committee held a number of hearings in February and March 2005. This article is based on the testimony of three expert witnesses who appeared on March 9, 2005.

**********

Peter Aucoin: I want to start by saying that an electoral system should assessed on two grounds: how well it represents citizens and how well it promotes effective government. I say this because the process you recommend be put in place is not neutral to this issue.

A process of review has to include public education based on sound research, a dialogue with the public and political participants, and a well-informed and impartial assessment of the status quo against practical alternatives. At issue is an electoral process for parliamentary government, not just for electing people to the House of Commons.

Canadian experience demonstrates that a commission of inquiry is best positioned:

* to conduct a credible and respected research program;

* to educate citizens and political participants using various instruments, including interim reports;

* to dialogue with citizens and political participants across Canada in a timely and meaningful fashion.

Commissions have the capacity to exercise a challenge function so that dialogue is not just one-way communication. Commissioners can challenge the objectives and priorities that people put forward. And, of particular relevance to this subject, they challenge the various claims that are made on behalf of the status quo and reform proposals. One does not have to read very much of the public deliberations about electoral system reform to find facts and errors punctuated all the way through these discussions.

It is also terribly important that a process both be and be seen to be impartial in its assessment and recommendations about the electoral system. The best research programs that we have had on these sorts of matters in Canadian history are clearly those that have been conducted by royal commissions.

Given all of the above, and, in particular, the nature of the issue on electoral reform, which so fundamentally affects both elections and those who are candidates for elections, a commission should be complemented by a parliamentary committee that would do at least the following. First, it would review and assess the commission's interim report. Second, it would dialogue with other MPs and representatives of those parties not represented in the House. Here in particular, the challenge function is terribly important in...