On Oct. 10, Ontarians will vote in a provincial referendum, the first one since 1924 and the first one ever to decide an issue related to something other than alcohol. In this case, voters will vote on how they vote.
Of course, it is not the first time elections have changed since Confederation. Ontario’s voting franchise has come a long way by lifting or reducing restrictions on gender, age, race, wealth and occupation. Fixed election dates also mean that we will vote for the first time based on a date determined by the calendar instead of political expediency.
This time around, voters will have a say on the very make-up of those who represent them.
The referendum will decide if voters want to continue electing politicians and parties based on the most votes candidates receive in their ridings. Or voters may select a system which would distribute legislative seats based on proportionality of the total vote.
Arguments about the advantages and disadvantages of each system have been made – some are definitely more convincing than others.
But whether or not we think this new system would be better, one thing that appears obvious is that the current system is hardly engaging Ontarians as democracy should. Voter turnout in the 2003 provincial election continued a trend of ongoing decline. Only 56.9 per cent of eligible voters showed up to vote.
We are often told that this trend reveals an increase in voter apathy. But surely apathy is a misnomer. Most Ontarians are very interested in decisions made by politicians that affect them every day.
Just ask someone in a hospital emergency room who has been waiting the entire night if they have an opinion on health-care policy. Or ask a parent of school-aged children if they are concerned about what their children are learning in the classroom.So if people care about these issues, why do they fail to show up at the ballot box? Probably many who don’t vote question if their once-every-four-year “civic duty” really makes a difference. Others are perhaps unhappy with any of the choices they are presented with.
If real democracy is to function something clearly needs to change and thankfully other options do exist. Some have been tried to various degrees of success but others are rarely given any attention in university political science departments and do not see the light of day in mainstream media.
Which is too bad. With something as important as democracy, we need all the options in the debate that we can get. And as part of that debate we need to try things out.
So why not trust the 103 randomly selected Ontarians who studied electoral systems this past year and then overwhelming recommended it’s time for this change? The new system is not perfect but if we don’t like the results we can always go back to what we have. Or better yet, we can continue looking for a system that really engages voterss.
There is a lot at stake. And just because voters don’t show up at the ballot box on Oct. 10, doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t realize it.
–Garrett Zehr