Government making a mockery of throne speech compromise (Sept. 21, 2005)
September 21, 2005
GOVERNMENT MAKING A MOCKERY OF THRONE SPEECH COMPROMISE ON ELECTORAL REFORM
The federal government is "making a complete mockery of the Throne Speech compromise on electoral reform", according to Fair Vote Canada, responding to today's reports that Minister Bélanger says a process will not be concluded during the life of this Parliament.
In October 2004, all parties agreed to an amendment to the Throne Speech instructing the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs "to recommend a process that engages citizens and parliamentarians in an examination of our electoral system with a review of all options." After extensive negotiations by MPs from all parties, the Standing Committee sent its recommendations to Parliament in June, calling for appointment of two consultation committees by October 1 with final recommendations to Parliament on electoral reform by Feb 28, 2006.
"It now appears the Government is not acting in good faith on the Throne Speech compromise," said Fair Vote Canada President Wayne Smith. "MPs from all parties hammered out a joint recommendation, but the Government's footdragging makes it clear they intend to dodge the issue again."
Smith also emphasized the Government response is even more disturbing given that the Committee's recommendation still allowed Parliament to retain final say over a decision that belongs in the hands of voters rather than politicians.
"While the Standing Committee recommended formation of both a new Parliamentary Committee and a Citizens' Consultation Committee to study and report on electoral reform, their compromise left the final decision in the hands of Parliament," said Smith. "Common sense tells us those elected under the current system are in an obvious conflict of interest on this issue."
Fair Vote Canada has called for a national reform process that is: 1) owned and driven by Canadians without interference or undue influence by the Government, political parties and elected officials; 2) transparent and objective; 3) maximizes opportunities for all Canadians to learn about the role and types of voting systems; and 4) allows Canadians to make the final decision, by majority vote, through a national referendum.
"Parliament can still choose to do the right thing-set up a citizen-driven process, similar to that used in BC, Ontario, or in New Zealand-and allow citizens themselves to choose the best voting system," said Smith.