2016 Canadian federal electoral reform consultation

2016 Canadian federal electoral reform consultation
Name	2016 Canadian federal electoral reform consultation
Date	2016
Location	Ottawa, Canada
Organizers	Prime Minister's Office, Minister of Democratic Institutions
Outcome	Advisory report; no change to voting system

2016 Canadian federal electoral reform consultation The 2016 Canadian federal electoral reform consultation was a federal initiative under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef to solicit submissions on replacing the First-past-the-post electoral system used in Canada with alternative voting systems such as proportional representation, ranked ballot, and mixed-member proportional representation. The consultation occurred amid commitments made during the 2015 Canadian federal election campaign and intersected with debates involving the Liberal Party of Canada, the Conservative Party of Canada, and the New Democratic Party.

Background and context

The consultation grew from campaign promises by Justin Trudeau and the Liberal platform during the 2015 Canadian federal election to pursue electoral reform, citing concerns raised in reports by institutions such as the Law Commission of Canada and advocacy by groups like the Fair Vote Canada and the Electoral Reform Society. It followed precedents including the 2004 Royal Commission on the Reform of the House of Commons, provincial initiatives in British Columbia, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island, and referenced studies by academics at Queen's University, McGill University, and the University of British Columbia on voting systems including single transferable vote, alternative vote, and mixed-member proportional representation.

Consultation process and methodology

The process was led by the Office of the Minister of Democratic Institutions and used online platforms developed in consultation with the Privy Council Office and the Library of Parliament. It combined public town halls in cities such as Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver with written submissions solicited from organizations like the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada (Elections Canada) and academic bodies including the Institute for Research on Public Policy. Methodological guidance referenced comparative analyses in United Kingdom, New Zealand, Germany, and Australia and drew on normative frameworks from scholars at York University and Dalhousie University.

Key stakeholders and submissions

Stakeholders included national parties (Liberal Party of Canada, Conservative Party of Canada, New Democratic Party, Bloc Québécois, Green Party of Canada), provincial governments such as Quebec and Ontario, electoral administrators like Elections Canada, advocacy organizations Fair Vote Canada and Electoral Reform Society, constitutional scholars from University of Toronto and McMaster University, and international experts from International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Submissions ranged from single-issue briefs by groups like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to multi-disciplinary analyses from the Institut de recherche en politiques publiques and electoral modelling by researchers at the University of Calgary and Simon Fraser University.

Main proposals and models considered

Proposals covered a spectrum: maintaining first-past-the-post status quo defended by some Conservative and federalist stakeholders; adoption of ranked ballot (known as alternative vote) as advocated by certain Liberal caucus members and municipal experiences in British Columbia; various forms of proportional representation including mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) modeled on Germany and New Zealand; single transferable vote (STV) promoted by advocacy groups and electoral reformers; and regional or hybrid options such as dual-member proportional systems studied by academics at Carleton University and McGill University.

Political reactions and parliamentary debate

The initiative prompted debate in the House of Commons of Canada between ministers including Maryam Monsef and opposition figures such as Rona Ambrose and Tom Mulcair, with interventions by senators from the Senate of Canada and commentary from provincial premiers including Kathleen Wynne and Rachel Notley. Parliamentary committees, notably the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, held hearings and summoned experts from Elections Canada, constitutional authorities like Peter Hogg (posthumously referenced in scholarship), and international observers from Osgoode Hall Law School and the Munk School of Global Affairs.

Outcomes and government response

The consultation culminated in a ministerial report that summarized submissions and recommended next steps, but successive statements from Justin Trudeau and Maryam Monsef led to the government announcing that it would not proceed with a binding referendum or legislated change to the electoral system. This outcome contrasted with the approach in New Zealand and prompted criticism from advocates including Fair Vote Canada and commentators at publications such as The Globe and Mail and The Toronto Star. The decision influenced internal dynamics within the Liberal Party of Canada and drew analysis from political scientists at Carleton University and Queen's University.

Impact and subsequent developments

After the decision, attention shifted to provincial reform efforts in British Columbia and Prince Edward Island where referendums and legislative actions on proportional representation continued; federal discourse returned to topics involving the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act and modernization of Elections Canada. Academic follow-ups appeared in journals associated with Canadian Journal of Political Science and policy centres like the Fraser Institute and the Conference Board of Canada. The episode influenced later electoral debates during the 2019 Canadian federal election and ongoing scholarship at institutions such as McGill University and University of Ottawa.

Category:Electoral reform in Canada