Contact UsSearch
Click for Search Instructions
Home > Get Involved

Submission HAWKINS-0411 (Online)

Submission By Guy Hawkins
AddressPowell River, BC,
Organization
Date20040515
CategoryCitizens' Assembly process, Democratic government
Abstract
The Citizens' Assembly should further the cause of democracy by making each person's vote count whether or not that vote was cast for the party that ultimately won the most seats in the legislature. [3 pages]

Submission Content
Why are so many voters cynical, and unhappy with the democratic process? Could it be that we have no real experience with democracy? All our institutions are hierarchical authoritarian, top down structures. Families are not democratic, churches are not democratic, schools are not democratic, the work place is not democratic and corporate structures are not democratic.

All these institutions are political; they are not, however, in any way democratic. We have no real personal experience with democracy except the quasi-democratic process of electing the people who govern us. If we have no personal experience of democracy in our everyday life, where do we get our idea of what a democracy is? When I was a teacher I had on the front board for students to ponder; Why do you think the way you do and who benefits when you think that way? We believe that our government is democratic because we choose the people who govern us through our votes. When we vote we want to believe that our vote counts. Our vote should matter whether we vote for the party that forms the government or for another party or candidate.

I have a book with me titled, Fixing Canadian Democracy, published by the Fraser Institute, and edited by Gordon Gibson, the person responsible for drafting your mandate. In appendix 1 entitled, 'A Report For The Need for Certain Constitutional Change in British Columbia, and a Mechanism for Developing Specific Proposals', authored by Gordon Gibson, Gary Lauk, Nick Loenen and Rafe Mair, it states:

The authors of this report believe that most of the problems identified by the citizenry today come back to the control structure of government, which is supposed in theory to be a democracy run by our elected representatives.

The key words here are, 'is supposed in theory to be a democracy',

We, that is the average citizen, have a vague idea of the theory of democracy but we know that our government does not act in accordance with our theory of democracy.

The Citizens' Assembly has been convened to do what it can to rectify the discrepancy between the theory of democracy and the actual practice of governance. We could liken this to the Civil Rights movement in the US beginning in the mid 50s and culminating in the late 60s. In the case of the civil rights movement it was a discrepancy between the constitution of the US and actual practice by governments at all levels from federal to municipal. The Citizens' Assembly is a first step to reconcile the theory of democracy in governance and the actual practice of governance.

So what recommendation can the Citizens' Assembly make that would further the cause of each person's vote counting whether that vote was cast for the party that ultimately won the most seats in the legislature or was cast for a party or candidate that did not win? We could believe that fixing this discrepancy would make the government more democratic.

In this vein of making each person's vote count I'd like to quote from the aforementioned appendix a statement which appears under the heading, 'The effectiveness of representatives':

The way our system has evolved, government MLAs do what the premier tells them to do. Therefore they cannot represent their electors fairly. Opposition MLA's normally do what their leader tells them to do as well, though that leader has far less in the way of sanctions to enforce his or her will.

It would appear from this statement by Gordon Gibson that in order to make each vote cast meaningful the power of the premier and opposition leader must be addressed. Yet, Gordon Gibson, in creating your mandate, specifically stated that you may only recommend a system that is in accordance with the Westminster Parliamentary system of governance. When I researched this system for my presentation to you I found the following characteristic of the Westminster Parliamentary system:

There are a number of consequences of the Westminster system. They tend to have extremely well-disciplined legislative parties in which it is highly unusual and generally suicidal for a legislator to vote against their party and in which no confidence votes are very rare. Also, Westminster systems tend to have strong cabinets in which cabinet members other than the prime minister are politicians with independent basis of support.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/westminster_system

It is my belief that this is an accurate description of the Westminster Parliamentary system.

In Gordon Gibson's own words he has stated that the lack of a democratic government lies in the power of the premier's office and yet he has mandated that you select a system of vote counting that is consistent with the undemocratic centralization of power in the premier's office.

I take my guidance again from the civil rights movement in the US. It was not the government that pointed out the discrepancy between the constitution and the actual rights enjoyed by the citizenry but the people themselves. It was a battle between the governments at various levels and the common people just wanting their constitutionally guaranteed rights. The Citizen's Assembly has been given their mandate from the government ; the Citizens Assembly therefore is a reactive rather than proactive body. You were not charged, as the Honourable Geoff Plant Minister Responsible for democratic reform suggested, and I quote again from the aforementioned book, this time from a chapter titled, 'Reforming Government' and authored by the minister himself:

The job of this Assembly would be to assess all possible models for electing MLA's ; things like preferential ballots, proportional representation, and even the status quo... We were elected to keep these commitments and we intend to keep them.

If your mandate was derived from the Minister's statement you would not be constrained in your search for a more democratic system of translating votes cast into seats won by the caveat that you are only allowed to entertain submissions that conform to the Westminster Parliamentary System or even the Constitution of Canada; for surely if we are to believe that our system of government is democratic then if the citizens want to change the constitution under which they are governed it is within their power to do so.

If the Citizens' Assembly is to be a democratic body representing the electorate it should be allowed to consider, 'all possible models for electing MLAs' as stated by the Minister. You should not restrict your search for an electoral system to the mandate created by Gordon Gibson, senior fellow at the Fraser Institute, an extremely biased and partisan individual. Why would Gibson create restrictions on your assessments of models for electing MLA's and that restriction being that it must conform to the Westminster Parliamentary System which centralizes power in the office of Premier? If the Assembly can only entertain models that conform to the Westminster System you are not able to asses models for electing MLA's that are actually in use in Canada in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut which do not conform to the Westminster Parliamentary system.

Why does Gordon Gibson not want you to assess the system for electing MLAs in these two territories?

Could it be that in the election systems of the Northwest Territories and Nunavat the power of the premier's office and cabinet is severely restricted due to the fact that it is the legislative body that elects the premier and cabinet?

My recommendation is that the CA address the biased directive as inappropriate and that you act as a forum for the people of this province and not in the interests of special interest groups such as the Fraser Institute.

© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral ReformSite powered by levelCMSSite Map | Privacy Policy