Let's be unconventional: Why we need a convention on democratic reform
Botched projects and boondoggles? We've had our share. It's time for bold solutions
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have always felt strongly that our province could be so much more, if only we had control over our own destiny. Today, most of us have come to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter who is in power because the results will always be the same.
History supports that belief.
Many times over the years, Newfoundland and Labrador has suffered the experience of botched projects and boondoggles that the working and middle class have paid for, while elite contractors profited off the work.
Muskrat Falls is just the latest example.
Many recognize that rather than changing the party, we need to change the system, which is now designed for executive dominance.
There is incredible potential for abuse of power and poor decision-making.
Furthermore, we are on the verge of a full-blown financial crisis — and it's clear that our ruling class is not up to the challenge of righting the ship.
Coming soon: an all-party committee
Andrew Parsons, the minister responsible for democratic reform, in February announced an online consultation on democratic reform. An all-party committee will accept submissions on what the people of the province would like to have discussed as part of the democratic reform process.
Getting serious about improving our system of governance is our best option for getting the province on the right track
Voters should absolutely engage in this process and give their feedback online. I encourage everyone to also hold town halls and focus groups in their area, and bring those voices to the table.
However, we also need to look further, at global models of governance. For instance, New Zealand received international attention in May for a "well-being" budget that emphasizes things like mental health and cutting child poverty.
For a model of effective engagement of citizens, we should look to American history. The Philadelphia Convention of 1787 is an example of how to discuss changes to a system that is not working effectively.
Participants such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison came to the convention with the idea of creating a new form of government, rather than revising what was then the existing system.
Our institutions are not working for most of us because most of us had no voice in designing them.
A convention could bring everyone to the table who hasn't previously had a voice in creating our governing institutions. Feedback from citizens can be discussed in an open venue with an eye to creating more checks and balances.
It is a revolutionary approach, but we are living in a time that calls for bold solutions.
Checking boxes, not genuine consultation
Our problem in Newfoundland and Labrador has never been a lack of resources or a lack of talent. Our system of governance fosters poor decision-making in numerous ways.
For instance, strong links between the executive and legislative branch of government fail to provide checks on bad public policy. Decisions are made on the basis of power, not evidence.
Our electoral system keeps traditional political parties in power and enables the rise of populist leaders.
Our campaign finance laws give too much power to elites and big businesses.
Political parties act as gatekeepers. They decide who gets to enter the system. Governing parties use public resources to accomplish their political goals. Hiring processes, similarly, lack openness and transparency.
There's also a lack of transparency in government, and a lack of access to its information. There is poor management of government records, which results in a lack of accountability on the part of elected leaders and civil servants.
Consultation processes are designed to check boxes rather than attract meaningful feedback from voters.
Let's target first-past-the-post
Our country and province continue use the first-past-the-post system, meaning we elect on a district-by-district basis. In reality, you only need about a third of the population to vote for you in order to rule.
First-past-the-post encourages high levels of political spending at the local level. It fosters policy that buys off districts, rather than provide a strategic approach to planning.
However, it also ensures that rural concerns are heard at election time.
Many countries across the globe have moved to a mixed-proportional representation system that enables parties to achieve a proportion of seats, based on popular vote, but also factors in geographic distribution. This has become increasingly popular as the world urbanizes.
Any discussion on electoral reform should involve an education process with the public on the pros and cons of various electoral models around the world.
Our province also needs a discussion on election security and online voting. These are issues that are likely to dominate political discourse in the coming decades.
Usually a shift to a new electoral system would be voted upon by the population in a referendum.
Finance laws favour the old guard
The financing of candidates and parties is problematic on a number of fronts.
Current fundraising mechanisms continue to support the old-style campaigning that has become increasingly meaningless to voters. They often feel disconnected from campaigns that involve high levels of signage, bus tours and rallies.
In the age of the 24-hour news cycle and social media, old-style campaigning is not the way voters want to connect with political parties. This is particularly true of young voters.
Historically, election outcomes have been decided by the amount of money candidates have for advertising and signs. Increasingly, however, money for campaigning is seen as a sign of indebtedness to business contacts.
There are frequent calls to have more working-class people elected and to write the campaign finance laws in ways that will not disadvantage them.
It is often considered highly problematic that unions and private sector companies can donate to political campaigns.
As well, many donations continue to come from numbered companies, and that lacks transparency.
Lopsided economy, poor planning
There have been massive global shifts in the economy since the 1970s that have been awful for the working and middle classes, with a massive redistribution of wealth in favour of corporations, executives, banks and property owners.
Job growth numbers are increasingly distrusted because voters know many people are working multiple jobs. Yet our leaders keep touting job numbers alone as a sign of a healthy economy.
Canada has stayed focused on the colonial-style resource economy that puts royalties in the hands of government. Successive governments have failed to effectively develop our economy into a global service economy.
Our leaders have also failed to address the realities of climate change or to develop green energy sectors, as investment in oil and gas declines. Governments continue to focus on the development of fossil fuels, infrastructure and megaprojects.
Government itself is a sector in crisis on a global scale. Across the world, many jurisdictions have turned to disrupter, far-right governments, seeing them as a last resort.
In Newfoundland and Labrador, we know that we do not have time for this.
Getting serious about improving our system of governance is our best option for getting the province on the right track, in a timely manner.
It deserves as much attention and resources as any conversation we have ever engaged in as province.
It is also long past due.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
