SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 80

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 2, 2022 10:00AM
  • Jun/2/22 12:30:10 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-14 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for that excellent question. Earlier I said that I was part of the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, which travelled across the country to hear what people had to say. This is an issue that came up many times. I know that in my colleague's riding, people like to know who their MP is, sometimes so that they can congratulate him, sometimes so that they can criticize him, sometimes so that they can hold him to account and sometimes so that they can ask for federal government services. That is entirely appropriate. We could have a big discussion about that, but there is a way to maintain that contact. Let us look at Germany, which has a mixed member proportional system. Half of the members are elected in local ridings, like in our current system. The other half are elected by a proportional voting system. Proportional representation corrects the major distortions created by a purely local electoral model. Why is it that Conservative voters have basically no representation in Toronto? Why do Liberal voters have no representation in the Prairies? I think we also need to keep that in mind. There are models that can help us maintain that connection with voters while correcting problems with the system.
215 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 12:33:12 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-14 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his speech and especially for having once again raised the issue of our current voting system. I, too, was a member of the Special Committee on Electoral Reform. I was particularly amused to hear the hon. member recall the weird survey the government did, called “vox populi”. It turned out that even when it tried to torque the questions to get the answers it wanted, the survey was never clear, because no one ever had a chance to just mark down “I want proportional representation.” It was very twisted. We did find out that 70% of Canadians who did the survey said they would rather see a lot of smaller parties work together, even if it takes longer, to come to decisions in a co-operative fashion by consensus. Our system here is way too adversarial and way too partisan, and it is not necessary. Can the hon. member imagine a time when we can get rid of the perverse voting system we have here? We have been promised it over and over again by the Liberals, but it was snatched away from us.
201 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 12:34:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-14 
Madam Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. If we look at the number of members that the parties get elected and the number of votes they get nationally, it creates distortions, as I was saying earlier. There was one election where it took an average of 35,000 votes to elect a Liberal member, 40,000 votes to elect a Conservative member, 80,000 votes to elect an NDP member and practically 300,000 votes to elect a Green Party member. It is completely unfair to the voters. I think that we do indeed need to work together, collaborate on finding a better system that will be fairer for everyone and will likely produce governments that will have to work together. A proportional voting system is not just more respectful of the voters; it also changes the political culture. I know that my colleague is keen on that notion and that idea. It creates parliaments that are less aggressive and confrontational with a lot more dialogue and consensus building. I think that is best for our democracy and it is also what people want from us.
186 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 1:30:04 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-14 
Madam Speaker, maybe the reason nobody said anything during the member for Kingston and the Islands' speech is that we were all speechless as we watched him dig himself deeper and deeper into a hole. The member spoke at length and in great detail about the Bloc Québécois opposition motion we voted on on March 2. He said the Bloc Québécois is frustrated by the outcome of its opposition day vote and is responding to defeat by trying again. That motion said that any scenario for redrawing the federal electoral map that would result in Quebec losing one or more electoral districts or that would reduce Quebec’s political weight in the House of Commons must be rejected. That day, we won the vote. We did not lose. Two hundred and sixty-one members of Parliament voted in favour of our motion. Who were some of those 261 MPs who voted in favour of it? The member for Kingston and the Islands, for one, and the member for Winnipeg North, for another. The member for Kingston and the Islands could answer my question by simply apologizing and saying that he did not understand, or that he never understands what we are voting on, or that he simply has no credibility. Those would all be good answers, and I will let him choose one.
233 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 1:31:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-14 
Madam Speaker, I was there for that, and I certainly do remember voting in favour of it, but I ask the member if there was an amendment put forward by the Bloc, because I specifically remember the Bloc pushing for this angle of the 25%. Whether it was through an amendment that was defeated or on another occasion completely, and I could be wrong, I know the Bloc has been pushing this matter, and I am also aware the House has shown that it is not interested in proceeding. If I remember correctly, I believe there was an amendment put forward, and it would have been that amendment the Bloc had put forward that was defeated, but I could be wrong.
121 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 4:37:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I like the member's idea on adjournment proceedings, but I think it should be moved to earlier in the day. It should actually follow question period and it should be shorter. Perhaps the system could be either a random draw done by the Speaker right away through the clerks, or a first-come, first-served system. Whatever it is, could the member comment on that part? It would be like a continuation of question period, perhaps, just in a longer format. That way, members do not have to stay until the very end of the night and parliamentary secretaries would not have to spend the entire day hoping for the member to show up. The second part is about making this place a family-friendly environment. I wonder if the member could comment on pairing, because I know everybody seems to sometimes like the voting app, until it does not work in someone's case because he has grown out facial hair and the app does not recognize him, and then he has to call in just to make sure his vote is counted. That is more of a problem for the men in this place. There is a specific one I am thinking of who continuously has problems with the voting app because he has let his beard grow out, but we already have a tool that has existed for hundreds of years and that was used extensively during World War II to ensure members would be able to vote. Since 1992, it has been connected to the whips. There is a binder on the desk for the table officers where a member can pair their vote and it is signed off on by the whip. Could the member perhaps speak to that use of pairing, instead of continuing with the voting app?
307 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/2/22 5:09:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Calgary Rocky Ridge for his speech. I believe that there are some things we agree on with respect to the hybrid Parliament. I found the points he raised to be very interesting. I would like to ask him a question about constituents. We often hear about the advantages or disadvantages for elected members of voting from home, as though it were a video game. At the same time, we are accountable to our constituents. In his opinion, what are the disadvantages of the hybrid Parliament? I know he mentioned a few of them. The disadvantages of the hybrid Parliament may be unintentional, but we could address them. How can we better serve constituents by being in this place rather than at home?
129 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border