this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
31 points (94.3% liked)
CanadaPolitics
2840 readers
5 users here now
Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Quite right.
But what I'm excited about is a major party actually saying that the govt can actually solve the housing crisis, a reference to when the govt did this in the past, and describes a practical way of doing it.
If we won't reward a party that actually comes up with a plan because we don't trust them, when is any party going to actually do it?
And don't forget, Trudeau actually did do some of the things he promised---like legalizing cannabis. And that was something that I heard nothing but hand-wringing about from other politicians my entire life!
You make fair points about housing and cannabis legalization. The Liberals do occasionally follow through on promises, especially when they align with both political opportunity and public pressure.
However, electoral reform is more fundamental than any single policy area. When Liberals promised that 2015 would be "the last election under first-past-the-post", they weren't just offering another policy - they were promising to fix the democratic foundation upon which all other policies rest. According to the opposition, Trudeau repeated this commitment to "make every vote count" more than 1,800 times, clearly understanding how much it resonated with voters.
The Electoral Reform Committee recommended proportional representation after extensive consultation, but Trudeau abandoned it when he couldn't get his preferred system. More recently, 68.6% of Liberal MPs voted against even creating a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform.
This matters because in a proper democracy, citizens are entitled to meaningful representation. A housing program (however needed) can be implemented and cancelled with each election cycle under our current system - what experts call policy lurch. But proportional representation would fundamentally reshape how all policies are developed, ensuring they better reflect what Canadians actually vote for.
I'm not saying we should dismiss other policies - housing is critically important. But it's worth noting that the same party repeatedly promising electoral reform for over a century (since Mackenzie King in 1919) while never delivering it suggests a deeply entrenched pattern that voters should question.
I mean, they weren't offering a policy at all. They had no plan, no specifics. They said they would take away one thing, but never gave details about what they would replace it with, and "nothing" was never an option.
They offered no policy.
This is policy. This has specifics. There is a plan attached to this.
Moreover, you can't truly hold Carney accountable for Trudeau's lack of action. He wasn't there, he wasn't involved. You may as well hold the NDP accountable for not getting it done while Trudeau was beholden to their support agreement.
Or hold the NDP accountable for all of the provinces they've made government in and never changed the electoral system. Who's actually worth trusting on this?
I appreciate your perspective, but there are several points worth clarifying.
First, the Liberals did have specific plans for electoral reform. The entire Electoral Reform Committee process produced clear recommendations for proportional representation after extensive consultation. The problem wasn't a lack of plan—it was that the plan (proportional representation) didn't align with Trudeau's preference for Alternative Vote, a system that would have benefited the Liberal Party.
Regarding Carney's accountability: while he wasn't personally involved, he's now leading a party with an established pattern of promising electoral reform without delivering. Since Mackenzie King in 1919, Liberals have campaigned on PR during multiple elections. Carney has been notably vague when asked about his position, despite being an economist who should understand the mathematics of fair representation. When an intelligent person is "uncertain" about ensuring every vote counts, it suggests political calculation rather than genuine indecision.
As for the NDP's provincial record, this "whataboutism" doesn't address the fundamental issue: our electoral system systematically discards millions of valid votes. At the federal level, 87% of NDP, Green, and Bloc MPs supported a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in 2024, while 68.6% of Liberal MPs opposed it. Actions speak louder than words.
The housing policy comparison misses the point. Electoral reform isn't just another policy—it's the foundation that determines how all other policies are made. The mathematical reality remains: in our democracy, citizens are deserving of and entitled to representation in government, and only proportional representation can dependably deliver that.
Democracy requires that every vote counts and affects outcomes. This isn't a partisan position—it's a democratic principle.