It has to be more than 25 years since we last chatted with one of our favourite Conservatives. His name is Patrick Boyer and he is a gentleman of the old school. You rarely meet a Tory today with his charm and intelligence. A writer, a former MP and a scholar trained in international law, Pat has written books on referenda. We can only hope that he is asked to explain referenda to the parliamentary committee on voting reform. He is one of Canada’s few experts on the subject.
The simple explanation of a plebiscite or a referendum can be that it is a reference by the rulers to the public for guidance in a decision. Whether or not the rulers are committed to the decision is something to be made clear in the authorizing of the vote. No doubt Pat could add considerable sub-text to that simplistic explanation.
But in a recent interview with the Toronto Star, Pat is quoted as saying that the United Kingdom has to be satisfied with its recent vote on leaving the European Union. In effect, Pat said that you cannot take it all back and say something like “Let’s go for the best two out of three.”
In a representative democracy, the attitude is usually that the politicians are elected to make the decisions. That is not the case though in questions dealing with how people will govern themselves and will choose their representatives. These questions place the representatives in a conflict of interest and they have no alternative but to request a reference to the voters. Questions such as Quebec independence and the Charlottetown Accord are clearly questions that could not be entertained otherwise. And questions related to fixing the out-dated Senate of Canada have the added impediment of being tied up in the constitution.
While the Trudeau government seems to be resisting the possibility of a referendum on voting reform, it does seem foolish for the opposition Conservatives to be insisting on a referendum on the subject before we know what change might be proposed. Canada hardly needs a referendum, for example, to move to Internet voting. Internet voting would enable low-cost run-off voting—which would solve the major complaint people have with our First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) system.
If Pat Boyer is to appear before the special parliamentary committee on voting reform, we will want advance notice so that we can be sure to watch it on Canada’s parliamentary cable channel (CPAC).
-30-
Copyright 2016 © Peter Lowry
Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]