Canadian Election Accentuates Divisions Once Again

July-August 1997

by David T. Koyzis

ANCASTER, Ontario—Canada's recent federal election (June 2) can best be understood against the back- drop of the 1993 watershed election that both revealed and accentuated this country's regional and linguistic divisions. In 1993, Jean Chretien's Liberal Party won a handy majority of seats in parliament, although only 41 percent of the electorate actually voted Liberal. The Progressive Conservative Party; which held the reins of government at the time, was decimated, winning only two seats in the House of Commons. The separatist Bloc Quebecois (BQ), under the charismatic Lucien Bouchard, gained the second highest number of seats, thus earning it the incongruous status of Official Opposition.

Parliament, after the 1993 elections, was divided five ways, though two of the parties, including the Conservatives, lacked official party status because of their slight support. The other two opposition parties, the BQ and the Reform Party, were and remain regional parties, lacking full-fledged national aspirations.

In this year's election Prime Minister Chretien sought a fresh mandate for his government, which had been largely successful in cutting the deficit and spurring economic growth. Yet, up to the time of the election, unemployment was running high and Chretien was widely perceived to have mishandled the ongoing national unity crisis. His home province of Quebec was especially skeptical.

The Liberal Party nonetheless managed to hold onto power, winning a slim majority of 155 seats out of 301. Parliament is still divided five ways. The new Official Opposition is the western-based Reform Party, which now has 60 seats. The BQ fell to 44 seats. The socialist New Democratic Party moved to 21 seats, and the Conservatives increased their number from 2 to 20. This means that for the first time, five parties will have official status in a system meant to accommodate only two. Commons proceedings are likely to become at once more lively and more unwieldy.

The most ironic outcome of this election is that the Liberals will be pretending (quite legally) to govern as a majority party even though 62 percent of the voters cast their ballots for other parties. With its new heavily Ontario-dominated cabinet, this false "majority" can only contribute to increasing regional alienation in a country badly needing forces driving toward unity and reconciliation.

If there is a potential bright spot in the election results, it is that more Canadians are coming to understand the role their electoral system has played in distorting representation and artificially fragmenting the country. The current system—usually labeled Single Member Plurality (SMP) or first past the post—rewards regionally based parties and handicaps parties with more national aspirations. And, as we are seeing here in Canada, it exacerbates regional tensions by making the country look more divided than it actually is.

Increasingly, there are calls to change Canada's electoral system to some form of proportional representation (PR). PR would produce a parliament that more accurately reflects the true proportion of popular support for the various parties. Even Toronto's Globe and Mail, which styles itself "Canada's National Newspaper," has published a series of editorials in recent months urging the adoption of some form of proportional representation, possibly in conjunction with the current SMP system. The Globe and Mail's influence could persuade the politicians to think more seriously about PR.

At the same time, normal partisan self-interest, coupled with Canada's British-based political culture, will make it difficult to implement this needed reform. It is not in the interest of a governing party to adopt a measure that promises to take away its "majority" status. Nor do Canadian political parties like to "collaborate" with their partisan rivals in coalition governments, because the latter is perceived to violate the adversarial character of the Westminster-style parliamentary system. But over the long term, Canadian leaders may have to conquer these obstacles, not only to make their democracy more representative, but ultimately for the sake of having national unity.

It remains to be seen whether Jean Chretien has the courage to subordinate the immediate interests of the Liberal Party to the long-term interests of the country as a whole.

[Dr. Koyzis teaches political science at Redeemer College in Ontario.]