” I had the opportunity to have Eleanor Hayward back on my channel and with a huge federal election coming up in Canada I thought why not post an added episode on the weekend!! Let’s talk Green Politics with one of my favorite Nature Warriors. Please GET INFORMED and VOTE!!! ” – Nature Girl
Microplastics are impacting our health care system and our planet. We need to eliminate them and use bio-degradable material and incentivize . See more about our plan moving towards Zero-Waste: https://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform…
Canadians deserve to have a support system for human and environmental health, including accessible mental healthcare. We need to implement a #TripleBottomLine accounting system to measure social & environmental values in addition to fiscal economics. The Green Party of Canada platform is supported by science with strategic sustainable solutions and evidence-based policy for People Planet & Prosperity.
Income inequality is rising; wealth is consolidating into the hands of a few. “Trickle down” economics to the public bottom line is a farce, demonstrated by the global fallout of 2008, hard-hitting our neighbours to the south; minimal regulation, on the chopping block, staved off the worst of despair for Canadians. While rising risk of poverty and homelessness plagues more since, abuse, addictions and illness can be ruinous; our national debt climbs. Pervasive since the 1970’s, this strategy has been proven ineffective by leadership and empirical standards. Yet many remain unaware of it, at least by name; fewer seem to realize that both big parties, and select individuals in companies legislated as individuals, have capitalized on the tenets of public asset deregulation, privatization and corporate welfare for select profit.
The neoliberal ideological agenda entails privatizing the gains by socializing the losses, exploiting social & environmental resources. Some claim with economic supremacy that austerity is their only move, yet seems a strategy to weaken us; I see you. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which we tend to measure economic success upon, not only goes up with consumer consumption, but also catastrophic events.
Our culture tends to blame the poor for their state of poverty. While Canadians remain some of the hardest-working in the developed world, too many remain within a job loss to automation, illness or accident’s reach of financial ruin. Canada is home to some of the most highly-educated people in the world, but the cost of this investment is steeply growing out or reach for many, and many immigrants are not able to practice in their field of expertise. Do we make poor choices, or over-consume? Sometimes. Are we too distracted by shiny things, and conditioned to over-spend? Perhaps. To individualize poverty on these premises is gaslighting the general public. The challenge is systemic and institutionalized, bordering on circumstances that are predatory and ethically criminal. Our market systems are being manipulated by growing private powers.
Do we tend to underestimate the extent of tax avoidance and evasion by those who can afford to manipulate legislative loopholes, for the gain of few at the expense of the many? Absolutely.
Do we look closely enough at where government subsidies are directed, such as fossil fuels? We’re learning to, using an evidence-based lens to develop policy. The Green Party pledges to level the playing field for the benefit of future generations over transnational corporations’ short-term profit. We can do better! By connecting overarching various government portfolios of industry, with sustainable solutions of evidence-based policy, we can move forward, together.
GPI: Greens are committed to improving our collective well-being. Greens recognize that we need new measurements of our societal health and prosperity. The GPC and I stand to implement a Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) for measuring the contributive value of community & ecological indicator values, to balance the Triple Bottom Line (TBL). Even economists lament the shortcomings of hanging our hats on GDP. Shifting our ideology and policy to include social and environmental values we will revolutionize our collective priorities. New Zealand has taken such steps, implemented with their Well-Being Budget, Imagine the value of shade, diversity, animals, plants and natural spaces; the value of healthcare, education, food security, altruistic volunteer and poverty indicators to our accounting system for example, beyond mere fiscal economic benefit.
Circular Economy: We waste raw materials, waste water, and waste energy. In
fact, of all the energy used by Canadians, more than half is wasted. Green
economic policies aim to improve the efficiency of resource and energy use by a
factor of four. In their seminal book, Factor Four, Ernst von Weizacker, Amory B.
Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins concluded: “The amount of wealth extracted from
one unit of natural resources can quadruple. Thus we can live twice as well – yet
use half as much.”
Improvements in labour productivity drove economic growth after World War II.
We must now repeat the exercise as we improve the efficiency of resource and
energy use, including innovation in the Circular Economy for Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR): https://www.greenparty.ca/…/it%E2%80%99s-time-get-
Guaranteed Livable Income (GLI): In the race to the top we seemed to forget our
principles of not leaving anyone behind. The niche economy has exacerbated
precarious work while disruptive technology is replacing repetitive jobs. Social
safety nets have been slashed and too many people are falling through the cracks.
How do we better plan for the future where conditions for safety, wellness,
creativity and innovation are fostered?
Working more, working poor? Guaranteed Livable Income for Health, Education, Innovation & Social Justice. EXTERNAL LINKS Among the countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Canada ranks 25th out of 37 when it comes to public spending on social services as a share of GDP. That’s below that of the United States.
Clean Economy: Pipelines export wealth & jobs while tar sands productions pollute water & air. We must plan to leave fossil carbon fuel as the source of emissions & virgin-petroleum plastics in the ground. The 2010 report of the International Energy Agency called for the removal of fossil fuel subsidies. Globally, they amount to over $300 billion a year, while renewables received approximately $30 billion. These perverse subsidies must be removed. It makes sense to reduce taxes on things we want – income and employment – while increasing taxes on things we do not want, like greenhouse gases (GHGs) and pollution. We must transition to the $26T clean economy: https://www.greenparty.ca/…/vis…/economy/corporate-subsidies
The biosphere upon which we all depend is suffering a trifecta of related anthropogenic challenges; environmental toxification, biodiversity emergency and climate change. These circumstances, with compounding feedback loops, present not just an environmental issue; the consequences compound into a grave national security threat. We require all hands on deck! The GPC presents a comprehensive strategy to transition our economy and meet our Paris emission targets, in line with guidelines empirical evidence determines we must; I will work for Milton to implement a national Climate Change plan with Mission: Possible. Already in Canada more people work in renewable energy than in the oilsands. In fact, 274,000 Canadians have cleantech jobs with an average salary of $92,000 per year. Investing in the Clean & Caring Circular Economy is essential to remain competitive and to create a vibrant society, while ensuring we have a livable planet for future generations of thriving, vital communities and ecosystems.
Environmental Toxification from industrial and plastic pollution is degrading our
water, air, soil and bodies. We must shift our neoliberal culture of planned
obsolescence for short-term profit together and evolve to integrate sustainable
solutions for our vital resources now, such as implementing Circular Economy
We face a Biodiversity Emergency. BioDiversity includes genes, species (we are one of these species) and ecosystems; they are being attacked, shaking the very foundation of our lives and livelihoods. The recently released global assessment of BioDiversity and Ecosystem Services is a wake up call for the future of all life on our planet – ours included. We are experiencing a sixth mass extinction as Species go extinct at a rate 1000 times greater than the background level, and ecosystems are collapsing as we use and abuse them beyond their ability to give us what we all need, free of charge. We must reset this course by moving to value and protect BioDiversity and ecosystems as the basis for a secure future for both current and future generations. As your MP, I will work to support the Convention of Biological Diversity and implement the strategic plan set out which includes the Aichi targets and the future Global BioDiversity Framework that will be endorsed in China in 2020.
The science is clear, the Climate Change crisis represents a national security threat. If we take strategic actionable steps, we can both mitigate and adapt to the global implications and worst of the environmental and social catastrophes projections. Internationally, climate refugee numbers are climbing. The domestic insurance industry is unprepared to deal with the projected damages due to the increasing results of extreme weather. Your private policies only go so far between the rate of planetary adaptation and bulk community liability. Who takes up the slack? Civilian labourers (you) and taxpayers (also you). Who needs to be held more responsible? Industries who externalize long-term environmental & social well-being for disproportionate short-term surplus profit. The politicians who are meant to represent their constituents need to hold polluters to account with a collaborative national strategy. The Green Party of Canada provides a plan called Mission: Possible. Not Left. Not Right. Forward Together.
Green Transportation & Infrastructure
It’s time our cities, towns and transportation systems entered the 21st century. Canada’s city planning is outdated. Eighty-two percent of Canadians live in urban centres, yet our roads, public transit systems, sprawling suburbs and disproportionately small municipal budgets are relics of a time when most of us lived in rural areas. Poor planning means gridlock, longer commute times, mismanaged bike lanes, overcrowded buses, smoggy skylines and unsustainable levels of greenhouse gas emissions from private cars. Build better, cleaner cities. Greens want smart city infrastructure designed for people, not cars. Our green growth plan includes upgraded municipal transportation budgets so that cities can generate jobs and afford efficient light rail transit, coordinated buses, bike lanes and pedestrian pathways. Canadians should love where they live. We want cities and towns connected by modern railways and public transportation, places where Canadian workers and families can move freely and easily experience all their regions have to offer. That’s why Green MPs will: ● Create a smart, clear National Transportation Plan ● Reinvest in our national rail network ● Restore bus service to rural and remote Canada and purchase electric buses ● Increase federal funding for pedestrian, cycling and car-sharing infrastructure in towns and cities
● Reinvest in public transportation infrastructure to make it convenient, safe, comfortable and affordable ● Offer rebates for purchasing energy efficient vehicles, and within 10 years ban the purchase of new internal combustion engine vehicles ● Mandate energy retrofits for all buildings by 2030
Sustainable Development & the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) Sustainable Development has been evolving steadily since the mid 1980’s. Considered as an approach to balance the ecological, social and economic needs of life on Earth, its’ roots in Canada stem from the Earth Summit in 1992; under the leadership of Canadian Maurice Strong, Agenda 21 was brought to life. Fast forward to 2019: Where are we now? Recognizing that we are no further ahead in many areas related to sustainable development, in 2015 the world agreed to an ambitious plan. Agenda 2030 was built on the 3-year global dialogue of “The Future We Want”. The results were an agreed-to approach with 17 goals and 163 targets spanning the ecological, social and economic spectrum. As your MP, I will work to make the SDG’s real to people in Milton and Canada, making the case for policies, processes and fiscal measures that leave no one behind. We must stop placing a debt on future generations opportunities for a peaceful and healthy life, as we have been taking more from our planet than it can give us. If we make the analogy or our ecological system to our economic system: What are we doing? In an economic system we strive not to draw down our capital, and continually build our reserve, living off the interest as much as we can. Compare this to what we are doing in our ecological systems – we are drawing down out ecological reserves and eating far into its capital – this has to stop. I see Agenda 2030 as a pivotal point for Canada. I believe that we have a real opportunity to halt and reverse the runaway systems that are decreasing the planet’s health and all life on earth, but also as a call to act and inspiration to work across parties to help shift the course for not only the future we want, but the future we need.
Canada has been built on a variety of cultures, religions, and ethnic backgrounds. One of the global Green Party values is Respect for Diversity, another Participatory Democracy; we strive to progress our culture with an inclusive attitude of solidarity.
It only makes sense that a well-educated population, thriving from a sense of wellness, is beneficial to our society and economy. Our social safety nets can modernize along with technology, including a Guaranteed Livable Income (GLI). We are strongest when we support the most vulnerable among us. The most important resource of a country is its people. To reach their full potential, citizens need an environment where they can grow, mature and innovate within safe, healthy, and secure communities. We have much work to do for truth and reconciliation so all can heal for the next phase of our human evolution, together.
Mental Health: Greens subscribe to the World Health Organization’s definition of health as “a complete state of physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Our present health care system addresses only one dimension – the treatment of disease and/or trauma by qualified professionals in publicly-funded medical facilities.
Greens applaud the creation in 2007 of the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC). The MHCC has estimated that mental illness costs the Canadian economy $50 billion per year. We support the call from the Canadian Alliance ofStudent Associations that the MHCC’s mandate be extended for another ten years (2015-2025) and to ensure a focus on the mental health of youth. VISION LINK https://www.greenparty.ca/en/statement/2017-05-03/mental-health- week-reforms-needed-mental-health-services-improve-well-being-and Preventive Wellness:
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”– Benjamin Franklin
Prevention and health promotion save lives and money.
A significant proportion of illnesses and deaths in this country are preventable. Many Canadians do not have the necessary information, tools, or the encouragement to lead healthier lives. Much needless suffering, premature loss of life, and considerable healthcare costs can be avoided through improved lifestyles (nutrition, exercise, and smoking cessation), dental care, health research, screening programs, more timely diagnosis, earlier treatment, healthier public policies and environments. For example, it is estimated that at least 50% of cancers are preventable. Yet funding allocated for health promotion has fluctuated in the vicinity of 1% of overall health system funding, despite the demonstrated cost-effectiveness of many disease prevention and health promotion programs.
Health promotion is about more than health care or health education. It is about recognizing the profound health impacts of determinants of health outside the formal healthcare system and working with many stakeholders (policy-makers, NGOs, health agencies, multiple levels of government, the private sector, and most important, affected communities themselves) to reduce, eliminate, or overcome those factors that harm health or act as barriers to health enhancement. We must promote factors which enhance the health, well-being, and quality of life of all Canadians.
The number one determinant of health is poverty. Ending poverty is not only a moral imperative, it will reduce burdens on our health care system. The Green Party of Canada recognizes the value of good health as a fundamental human right, and also the key to the most vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable Canadian society possible.
Greens want to move Canada towards being the world’s healthiest country by making improved and sustainable health for all a national priority. To make this vision a reality will require a long journey, a comprehensive effort touching many aspects of Canadian society. In the short term, we recommend the following actions to begin this journey. These recommendations can have an immediate, positive, and measurable impact on Canadian’s health, and turn us away from a health system focused on disease treatment to one where disease prevention and good health promotion are the priority. Green Party MPs will:
● Push for renewed Canadian leadership in health promotion both nationally and on the international stage. We have some of the best minds, training programs, experienced practitioners, and progressive health promotion coalitions in the world. These can be key building blocks in a renewed federal leadership in health promotion;
● Specifically, we recommend the following actions to take place immediately:
Restore funding for the Canadian Health Network, a key national resource for
individuals and health professionals across the country;
Create a Federal Healthy Community Initiatives Fund to which community
organizations can apply for innovative local projects utilizing community
development principles and practices to address both human and ecosystem
health at the local level;
Protect children from inappropriate exposure to marketing, especially of junk
foods and soft drinks (see development of a National Food Policy below, and
as in Agriculture and Food policy in section 1.15);
Create a Canadian Healthy Living Guide, similar to the recently revised
Canada’s Food Guide but more comprehensive in scope;
Work with provincial stakeholders to better compensate family physicians
and other health professionals for health education and health promotion
services work with key stakeholders such as the Chronic Disease Prevention
Alliance of Canada (CDPAC), the Canadian Lung Association, Canadian
Diabetes Foundation, the Heart and Stroke Foundation, and others to promote
integrated, innovative, evidence-based, inter-sectoral, and comprehensive
approaches to disease prevention and health promotion;
Institute a GST Health Benefit Exemption for those products/services deemed
to have significant health benefit such as sports equipment, fitness centre
fees, and some health-promoting health services;
Institute a Corporate Health Tax Reduction for workplaces that institute a
qualified workplace health model or comprehensive healthy workplace
settings approach such as that offered by the National Quality Institute;
Work to reduce the use of pesticides, growth hormones, antibiotics, and other
chemical and pharmaceutical agents in agriculture;
Seek a Canadian ban on all forms and applications of Genetic Use Restriction
Technologies through legislation;
Promote environmentally sustainable, organic farming practices that protect
the health of the land, farmers, and consumers;
Restore funding for critical food safety testing and new product approvals
Institute a National Junk Food Tax for non-essential, empty calorie foods and
beverages including high-fat, high-sugar, and high-salt snack foods;
Support the development and adoption of a comprehensive national set of
protective helmet standards for different sport and vehicle use and the
allocation of federal funding for a national education program to encourage
protective helmet use;
Develop a federal Health Impact Assessment Board to incorporate health
impact assessment as part of all federal government policy reviews, similar to
the current Environmental Assessment Board;
Support the development of initiatives to reduce the use of psychoactive
drugs through better rehabilitation and prevention programs, especially for
Restructure education of health care professionals to incorporate adequate
training in health promotion;
Provide computerized health promotion aids and make them accessible freely
to all Canadians;
Expand healthcare coverage to include basic preventive dental care;
Establish a minimum budget for health promotion at 1.5% of the total federal
In order to keep health care spending from continuing to skyrocket, we must find a way to control the cost of drugs. Currently, 20% of our health care budget is spent on pharmaceuticals – and this is the area of health care in which costs are rising most quickly. Pharmaceutical use must be more rigorously assessed on an evidence-based approach. Used as directed, it is estimated that prescription drug use leads to 150,000 deaths every year in North America. Health Canada has not performed adequately in assessing risks. Canada still lacks any requirement for mandatory reporting of side-effects from prescribed drugs. Far too often, conflict of interest in the relationship between those who advise government agencies, and even physicians who accept trips and promotions from the pharmaceutical industry, can influence decisions. There are two and a half drug sales representatives for every physician in Canada. Getting a handle on the use of prescription drugs can both save lives and cut costs. The best way to accomplish both life-saving and cost-cutting goals is through a universal Pharmacare program, a bulk drug purchasing agency, and make new drug patent protection times shorter. This national agency would follow the principles of the gold-standard for evidence-based assessment of the risks and benefits of pharmaceuticals – the Therapeutics Initiative at University of British Columbia. It is critical that no conflict of interest corrupt the drug assessment process. Drugs showing a greater harmful than beneficial effect will not be part of a national Pharmacare program. The Therapeutic Initiative (TI) approach identified Vioxx as such a drug, when Health Canada missed the risks. It is estimated that the TI assessment, and the willingness of the British Columbia Health Department to accept that advice, saved 500 lives in B.C. Advice to physicians from TI saved the provincial health care system approximately $700 million/year. These kinds of savings – in lives and health care costs – must be pursued across Canada. By bulk buying prescription drugs, based on a strong evidence-based assessment, costs will come down for the provincial delivery of health care. As well, we used to have a successful generic drug market in Canada, but changes to the patent laws have almost wiped it out. As patents for a number of commonly prescribed drugs are set to expire in the near future, this presents a great opportunity for the government to step in and provide less expensive generic drugs. The Green Party accepts the principle advocated by the Canadian Diabetes Association that no Canadian should spend more than 3% of his or her total after tax earnings on necessary prescribed medications and other treatments.
Adopt Real Justice, Truth & Reconciliation.
The Green Party of Canada affirms that all First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities have the right to determine their own membership, govern according to traditional governance structures, hold sovereignty over their traditional territories, practice their cultures and traditions, speak, retain, and reclaim their languages, and fully participate in guiding and directing any and all legal and policy decisions regarding their livelihoods. The Greens further affirm that Indigenous peoples have a right to access sufficient high-quality and culturally appropriate education, healthcare, employment, and other services to achieve a healthy standard of living. Therefore, in accordance with the recommendations made within the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP), the Green Party of Canada will support First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples in rebuilding, self-defining and self- identifying their own citizenship. We will support Indigenous peoples and follow their lead as they implement their own strategies for rebuilding Indigenous nations and measures to reclaim Indigenous nationhood. We will support measures to promote cultural revitalization and healing processes. We will support Indigenous peoples in building consensus on the basic composition of their Indigenous nation and its political structures and processes undertaken by individual communities and by groups of communities that may share Indigenous nationhood. Indigenous justice also requires eliminating the vestiges of oppression and colonialism. Greens are committed to end the provisions of the Indian Act. This monumental task requires us to work in full partnership with First Nations.
Eleanor Hayward recognizes the challenge of balancing the present moment with
We must stop placing a debt on future generations opportunities for a peaceful and
healthy life, as we have been taking more from our planet than it can give us.
If we make the analogy or our ecological system to our economic system: What are
we doing? In an economic system we strive not to draw down our capital, and
continually build our reserve, living off the interest as much as we can. Compare
this to what we are doing in our ecological systems – we are drawing down out
ecological reserves and eating far into its capital – this has to stop.
Tired/Bored of the Ping Pong Politics? Vote PEOPLE PLANET PROSPERITY!
The Natural Health Products Protection Association (NHPPA) is federally incorporated as a non-profit company with the sole objective of protecting access to Natural Health Products and Dietary Supplements. Health Canada has published and is looking to move forward with a time-table which dramatically changes the way in which Natural Health Products will be regulated for the public and Natural Health Practitioners. Essentially, this would mean that Natural Health Products would be treated the same way as chemical drugs are in the Food and Drugs Act.
To combat this, the NHPPA has a 3-step plan of action for stopping Health Canada’s changes to the NHP product regulation. Firstly, stopping Health Canada’s proposed plan to regulate natural health products as “Self-Care Products” under the same set of regulations as chemical nonprescription drugs. Secondly, to add the definition of Natural Health Product to the Food and Drugs Act. Lastly, to adopt the Charter of Health Freedom as Law. Categorizing Natural Health Products under self-care products such as drugs is clearly unwarranted because of their obvious differences and Canadians have been fighting against this regulation for the last 20 years. Freedom of choice on how we choose to manage and prevent disease within our bodies is our right. Adding a definition of a Natural Health Product in the Food and Drugs Act is extremely necessary in this approach. With this impending regulation the consumer will be affected in multiple ways, such as having little to no information on labels, censorship of scientific evidence of therapeutic usage and success, and no information on the efficacy and quality of the specific product.
The Charter of Health Freedom is a piece of proposed legislation that protects your constitutional rights by giving natural health products and traditional medicines their own Act. The Charter would protect access to NHPs and traditional medicines by creating a separate legal category for them that is neither foods nor drugs. Instead of being treated as dangerous drugs under the Food and Drugs Act, the Charter would deem NHPs and traditional medicines to be safe unless there is evidence of harm. The Charter of Health Freedom enables the definition and regulation of NHPs as a true third category with foods and drugs, a move that Canadians have specifically demanded of their government. The Charter reaffirms in law the long-standing relationship citizens of our great nation have enjoyed with the government as a servant, rather than a master in our affairs.
As Canadians have increasingly incorporated alternative approaches to their health, their practitioners will be greatly affected by this proposal. Naturopathic doctors, Traditional Chinese medicine doctors, Ayurvedic doctors, Nutritionists and Herbalists have become integral parts of keeping our citizens in good health using holistic approaches. This regulation serves to strip away jobs from these hard working Natural Health Practitioners and Canadian citizens. As censorship is enforced, increased fines and administrative penalties will be issued for telling the truth. By imposing the same Good Manufacturing Practices used by Chemical Drug companies to Natural Health Product companies there is a further increase of costs on the NHP community as a whole. Access to NHP’s will be reduced due the costly model of manufacturing drugs in turn causing prices to increase. Accessibility will further decrease to many Canadians as low-income families and citizens can no longer reason their natural health products as affordable. Small and medium manufacturers will go out of business reducing competition and access to innovative products.
This regulation affects all of us. Visit the NHPPA website and take action today on how to protect access to Natural Health Products.
Eleanor Hayward submitted the following Research Essay for McMaster University Political Science 2D03: Canadian Democracy on November 20th, 2017 to Professor Peter Graefe & Teaching Assistant Rachael Barnett.
policy is an essential component of representative liberal democracies, providing
a system to select citizens’ best delegates for the lower bicameral legislature.
In Ottawa, Ontario the institutional House of Commons (HoC) stands as an arena
for 338 Members of Parliament (MP) to debate significant issues and create
policy for our nation state. From the campaigning candidate pool of various parties,
more than 35.9 million eligible Canadians (Population Pyramid, 2015), select
politicians to embody the people’s will. The legal mechanism we employ is a
legitimately fundamental element which measures public opinion, translating
votes into representative governing shares to execute political power creating
law in the name of the public’s greater good. This is the foundation for each
bill proposed and amended, each with proponents and opponents discussing pros
and cons to negotiate and manufacture the will of Canada’s free electorate
across ridings from coast, to coast, to coast.
research and consultation has been undertaken to explore free and fair voting
processes. This paper descriptively examines the pros and cons of Canada’s current
federal electoral system, and alternately forms of more Proportional Representation
(PR) with examples from international experience. A pertinent summary of Canada’s
history and present position aims to brings the reader to date on this vital
topic of democratic representation. In addition, reflection through the
framework of information gleaned from McMaster University’s political science
curriculum is explored with analysis of data from various reputable resources
plus popular social media in assessment of public opinion contrasting the
official government narrative. Themes of power in discourse and extent of
minority inclusion are strung throughout from a perspective of democratic
electoral system currently employed is referred to as a First Past The Post
(FPTP) race of Single Member Plurality (SMP). Proponents claim it provides
constituents with localized support to efficiently usher along parliamentary
matters, especially with majority governments. Elected representatives are reportedly
transparent and accountable to the mercy of voters’ pen-strokes against them
“winner takes all” approach is sufficiently democratic in principle having
served since Confederation and many Canadians accept this account; this
perspective is questionable considering a minority of voters regularly manifests
“false majority” governments. It’s downright confusing why a plurality counts
as an applied expression of a majoritarian system. A plurality means that
whichever party gets the most votes wins the contest, not actually by winning a
race to fifty-plus-one percent as the common preconception of the term “majority”
distorting election results, FPTP creates both over and under-representation of
particular parties. The party leader with platform politics elected is First
among Members and responsible to appoint colleagues in service as Ministers and
Parliamentary Secretaries, with the Governor General’s (GG) blessing. Under the
responsible government model, this Cabinet is held to a convention of
collective responsibility in presenting legislation; all caucus members are
strongly encouraged to toe the party line, as long as the Prime Minister (PM)
holds confidence of the HoC. While the significance of this will be expanded
upon with a specific example in reflection and analysis, suffice it to say that
power is consolidated in this executive, requiring checks and balances to
of the SMP system consider Duverger’s Law (Orvis &
Drogus, 2018, p.307), with both mechanical and psychological effects, which
argues a disproportionally-powerful two-party system is bound to emerge and
perpetuate with one party holding control (Pappalardo, 2007).
eligible voters are left holding their noses in ballot boxes and strategically select
their representatives by striking their ballot against the candidate they do
not want, instead of going with their morals to choose a candidate who truly reflects
their values. By mechanical effect “wrong winners” can occur, for example two
candidates in different districts can receive the same share of votes, one wins
a seat while the other doesn’t. Moreover, many votes are systematically
disregarded by FPTP. This set of factors attributed to FPTP marginalizes
minority representation, namely of women and indigenous peoples in the HoC,
when parties tend to select candidates who are more electable, potentially
instead of the best qualified person for the job (Niagara Council of Women, 2017).
challenges are summed up by rational theorists, explaining there is no rational
reason for people to participate with time or money in political activity,
because there is little significant influence on outcome. These characteristics
collectively lower voter turnout, aggravating a collective action problem among
the distracted electorate. When actions have little or no effect, all may then
fail to act and all may suffer adverse consequences which may entail losing
control to the elite (Orvis & Drogus, 2018, p. 284), affecting democratic
FPTP is known to inflame partisan differences, aggravating an adversarial forum for contentious politics. Meanwhile proponents of PR suggest this alternate system penalizes politics of division, as candidates court second and third choice preferences from voters. Cross-party dialogue is given impetus, furthering legislative civility and collaboration [All Votes Count literature]
us explore the various options of PR first from its’ opponents’ perspective,
noting they are often proponents of FPTP. It can be argued PR is a hopelessly
complex approach which may needlessly confuse the voting public in ballot
boxes. Results lead to inefficient minority governments and often the need for
coalition support, which can blur the lines for public accountability. Government
would be inherently fractured and therefore more likely to be unstable. It is
argued the HoC becomes vulnerable to divisive extremist parties given a more
powerful voice where negotiations may necessitate concession detrimental to
leading party values. Proponents of FPTP argue change in the direction of PR is
irresponsible and risky since democracy is already being served, public
consultation demonstrates interest for electoral reform does not exist, and
other parliamentary issues are more pressing.
of FPTP are often alternately proponents of a more proportionally
representative system, which offers improved access for minority voices,
creating opportunity for shared political power with reinforced cooperation to
achieve consensus. In comparison to plurality systems, PR is likely to produce characteristic
multiparty systems, often broad and inclusive coalition governments, with more
equitable executive-legislative power relations. [ https://muse.jhu.edu/article/225619/pdf
include open and closed-list systems, from moderate to extreme implementation,
with hybrid models available in between. Italy and Isreal are represented with
closed-list extreme PR systems most dissimilar to SMP. Parties present a ranked
sequence of preferred candidates, and voters select their preferred party as a
whole. The pre-decided elected MP’s will receive seats in proportion to their
share of the votes, where candidates at the top of the list are selected, while
those at the bottom are not at the water mark number, calculating by vote
percentages to distribution of seats the party is expected to receive.
party list systems scale along several variations from relatively closed, to
more moderate or most open, all the way to free/panachage perspective by
implementation in principle. These assorted approaches allow voters influence
to elect individual candidates from the spectrum of party choices more than
closed-list systems do. In some nations, voters may be allowed several votes each
to rank individuals and/or their party of preference. Hybrid versions have been
crafted between FPTP and PR are often referred to as Semi-proportional or Mixed
Member Proportional (MMP) systems. Examples have been evaluated, selected and are
commonly employed widely across Europe, while also in Japan and Brazil among
PR even small parties can gain seats, often with a standard minimal electoral
threshold of 3-5% [(Orvis & Drogus, 2018, p. 288) applied. With fewer
wasted votes, participation rates are higher in turn. Data from the
International institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance show that voter
turn out per voting age population in PR systems are significantly higher at
68% to MMP’s 60% and SMD at 59% on average (Orvis & Drogus, 2018, p. 290). Analysis
of the World Values Survey demonstrates nations with PR are more tolerant of
diversity as well as more likely to adopt progressive social policies including
same-sex marriage and those reducing inequality. Proponents argue PR is more
democratic and more broadly representative. Canadians in the twenty-first
generally consider themselves progressive for women’s rights, yet in 2016 only
represent 26% of elected legislature (Orvis & Drogus, 2018). Varying
hypotheses suggest political culture and longer lengths of official national
democracy can not be discounted, although analysis of the World Classification
Table reviewing statistics on women in international legislatures also suggests
PR systems are more conducive to electing women than SMP. [comp poli text] Other
large-scale quantitative analysis shows higher overall human well-being, when
more issues are brought into multiparty arenas creating greater
competitiveness, giving incentives for better party performance when in power. (Orvis
& Drogus, 2018, p.291)
is obvious complexity in evaluating and selecting a fair PR system. Early in
the twentieth century it was too difficult to manually count ballots (Pilon
& Stephenson, 2016, p.12), now the modern advantage of transportation and
communication technologies greatly enhance their successful implementation. If
public education campaigns are specially crafted to present a clear, simplified
process, the argument of complexity is negated. However, the legitimate debate
continues, and some history of electoral institutions is presented next.
Canada’s Brief History of
chronological sequence is captured here with effort to facilitate the reader’s
comprehension of this complex issue to date. First of all, election systems are
not a constitutional issue. Although multi-member districts did exist SMP was
the early electoral process of choice as inherited from Great Britain’s
Westminster parliamentary model.
Confederation in 1867, only land-owning Caucasian men were permitted to vote in
contribution to this democratic institution, with racial and gendered
exclusions (Women’s Suffrage in Canada, n.d.). Eligible voter qualifications
changed over time; with some earlier exceptions, women struggled to earn
enfranchisement and succeeded with federal legislative changes to include most
women in 1918 for example. Individuals living in poverty, men and women of
ethnic ancestries then First Nation’s peoples eventually followed. Youth vote
expanded when voting age was lowered from twenty-one to eighteen in 1970. The right
to franchise was hard-won by many; in each of these achievements there existed
divisive opposition (Women’s Suffrage in Canada, n.d.). Franchise reforms
strengthened bonds between the people and the government instilling trust that
Canadians were more inclusively represented by democratic institutions. (Gould,
2016) The next phase of enhanced democracy comes not with voting eligibility,
but rather how cast votes are translated into representative shares of power.
King promised voting reforms while campaigning for the 1935 election, however
dispatched the issue to a committee and was forgotten once he was safely back
in power (Pilon & Stephenson, 2016, p.13).
Fast forward to the twenty-first
century when Liberal leader Justin Trudeau apparently recognized this ongoing inequality
by campaigning passionately for federal election since June 2015, originally
from a third-place polling position, creating a standard of his party platform promising
“We will make every vote count. We are committed to ensuring
that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the FPTP voting
system…within 18 months of forming government, we will introduce legislation to
enact electoral reform.” (Liberal Party of Canada, 2017)
Meanwhile, Ms. Karina Gould
campaigned for a seat as MP in her constituency of Burlington, Ontario. Running
on the Liberal platform, she was publicly recorded by interest-group Fair Vote
Canada (FVC) as supporting proportional representation (2017).
Many citizens were optimistic in
turn and supported the Liberal platform. The final results of the 2015 Canadian
federal election awarded Justin Trudeau’s Liberals 38.5% of the 17.5 million
popular voters, inflated by FPTP to represent a false-majority of 54% for a
total of 184 seats. Conversely the Green Party (GP) received 3.5% of the
popular vote, yet distorted by FPTP the election awarded GP only one seat. This
ineffectively wasted 51% of all votes, which under PR would have translated
more democratically represented eleven seats for GP, see Figure 1 for a visual (CBC
Once elected on a crimson tide
with a surprising majority government, the new PM was welcomed by the GG with Speech
from the Throne on behalf of the monarch: “Let us not forget, however, that
Canadians have been clear and unambiguous in their desire for real
change. Canadians want their government to do different things, and to do
things differently…They want to be able to trust their government,” (Johnston,
2015) In return the PM acknowledged this and pledged: “The government is
committed to open and transparent government…The trust Canadians have in public
intuitions – including Parliament – has, at times, been compromised… [and] Parliament
can restore it,” again specifically stating reform of Canada’s electoral
system so that 2015 is the last federal election conducted under the FPTP
system (Curry & Galloway, 2015).
Also elected on the red wave, MP
Gould readily spoke to the NDP opposition motion of creating the special
all-party parliamentary committee on electoral reform on June 2, 2016, she is
“Electoral reform is the next step in this evolution toward a more inclusive system. We can build a better system that provides a stronger link between the democratic will of Canadians and the election results, one that motivates Canadians to take part, one that reflects our collective values of fairness, inclusiveness, gender equity, openness, and mutual respect…I strongly believe [in] stepping away from the [FPTP] system and embracing a new system that can reflect these values.”
This motion passed, and the committee
was launched. Numerous expert hearings, town hall round-table meetings, and
website/email questionnaires from mydemocracy.ca consulted more than 360, 000
Canadians under supervision of Minister of Democratic Institutions, MP Maryam
Monsef. She was freshly replaced at this Cabinet post by MP Gould, and promises
from a third-place platform were abandoned eight months later on February 1,
2017 when, standing in front of media alone without visible PM support, she made
her first announcement as Minister presenting her official mandate. Gould concluded
that clear preference and necessary consensus on how or whether to change the
electoral system did not exist referring to results from the 300-page committee
report, stating it would be irresponsible to move ahead on this issue without
consensus, so it was not included on her first-place agenda.
This particular example of
collective responsibility and party discipline manifested as betrayal to
smaller parties namely the third-place NDP and fifth-place GP. These parties
arguably lost loyal supporters to strategic votes, believing 2015 would indeed
be the last year FPTP was implemented as promised repeatedly, which had evidently
back-fired. The mydemocracy.ca survey was criticized as uninformative and vague,
not even designed to reach consensus, followed by scathing accusations ensued
of intentional blatant deception; when the NDP opposition asked what would be
sufficient to continue, the question was largely avoided. The Burlington GP
candidate weighed in, commenting from local media that consensus is determined
when all parties agree, often with two-thirds majority, after working together
to find a solution to an issue underlining it’s not where we start (Fiorito,
Yet considering both British
Columbia and Prince Edward Island are currently moving forwards with PR
assessment, electoral reform may not be permanently off the table. Provinces
are often incubators to gauge success of pilot projects, for example universal
health care initiated by Saskatchewan, which may later be implemented
Reflection & Analysis
participation is key to liberally democratic institutions and power can be
deceptive. Political theorist Luke categorizes three dimensions of power; first
of persuasively influencing someone to do something, second to prevent someone
from doing something, and third, power to influence someone to think in ways
contrary to their own interests (Orvis & Drogus, 2018, p.8). Giovanni
Sartori succinctly referred to electoral systems as “the most specific
manipulative instrument of politics.” (Pappalardo,
Pilon suggests the public has never been in control of institutions, which have
been designed and maintained by the nation’s elite (2016,
p.13). Elite theorists suggest this is an obvious challenge for democracy,
as elite members of society have much greater access to key decision makers and
can therefore more likely to influence policy (Orvis
& Drogus, 2018, p.284).
second dimension of power is applied by pluralist systems with tendencies
toward fewer parties holding more representative power, preventing fair
participation. This makes democratic opposition more difficult as holding government
to account is less likely with fewer parties represented in the HoC (Pilon
& Stephenson, 2016, p.13). Perhaps a majoritarian plurality of seats in
contrast to percentage of voters’ wishes does present opportunity for
efficiencies in the system by allowing the governing party to bring legislation
along with less time and debate. However, arguably accomplished in the name of
the free people as established by fair elections. Artificial concentration of
power can have decidedly undemocratic effects, when the agenda of the majority
power passes over the voices of party representatives in minority positions.
third dimension of power may be less apparent; an informal review of social
media websites may reveal where this lies. When MP Gould spoke to electoral
form in June 2016, she posted the video to YouTube herself, which received more
“likes” at nine thumbs-up, with fewer “dislikes” with only one thumbs-down,
suggesting public support for change. Consider another example on YouTube (CTV
News, 2017) with Minister Gould’s press conference announcing her new mandate not
including electoral reform, which has received thirty-three thumbs-down, and less-than-half
as many thumbs-up with fourteen votes. It is assumed by this student these low
numbers are unadulterated and generally representative of the public’s
opinions, interpreted as disappointment at the government’s official narrative.
contrast, another video posted (CBC News, 2016) shows footage from the HoC of
PM Trudeau’s defense to accusations of abandoning his promise received 28,528
views overall, with 260 thumbs-up and half as many thumbs-down with 125 votes.
Why the flip-flop? Although acknowledging this small informal sample, it could
be perceived that more partisan interests viewed the latter video of Question
Period, and have self-interest invested to keep FPTP as the status quo
electoral system in Canada’s HoC. Perhaps Canadians were deceived by the
official committee consultation and confused by lack of clear educational
materials even if they were in support of more democratic PR, which may exemplify
the third dimension of power. Personally, this student cares about the issue,
but did create an especially informed opinion feeling unqualified to contribute
to the mydemocracy.ca survey in time, while naively believing the leading
party’s rhetoric that electoral reform would take place either way. Now a bit wiser,
the issue of collective action seems more obviously in existence also considering
experience that few people engage with their elected representatives
first dimension of power seems to be present in the official narrative that the
government will take care of the people without them having to do anything,
other than vote of course, meanwhile presenting the public weaponized
information, with this most easily manipulated instrument of politics. On the
up side, in the name of democracy, interest-groups FVC and Democracy Watch have
filed a Joint Ethics Complaint against the Prime Minister (FVC, 2017); claiming
88% of expert witnesses to the committee called for a proportional system,
according to a detailed FVC compilation. Results are to be determined.
conclusion, the formal legal electoral mechanism selected provided by Canada’s
institutions give distinct incentives to political parties, their leaders and
individual voters, so understanding the various opportunities will affect
citizen participation (Orvis & Drogus, 2018, p.284). The SMP system of FPTP
has been utilized since Confederation; proponents suggest this simple system
presents clear vertical accountability, and although ‘winner takes all’, a
stable and efficient government is secured to power, and the electorate may
vote them out next time if they are not happy with the results. In response,
opponents sometimes refer to FPTP to as antiquated notion due for refreshment.
They suggest Duverger’s Laws applies with both psychological and mechanical
effects leading to strategic voting, wasted and distorted votes, aggravating a
collective action problem. Alternately they suggest a more PR system where
more, if not all, votes count. Also, governments under PR systems are more diversely
representative of women and other minorities with better opportunity to
collaborate and cooperate in coalitions. Opponents of complex PR systems press
these fractured coalition minority governments are inefficient and unstable,
where extremist parties may find voice. Proponents suggest a minimal electoral
threshold mitigates this possibility while easing the divisive rhetoric of
elite parties in power.
demonstrates the power of democratic elections. Canadians through time have
fought for minority representation, first with access to voting at all, and now
reforming the electoral system itself with more proportional representation
provides a solution for Canadians’ growing disenchantment with Parliament and
apathy to their civic duty. Many people seem oblivious that free and fair
democratic representation is on the line, with trust instilled in our national