Leveling the field: The fight for electoral reform in Canada

"I’d rather vote for what I want and not get it, than for what I don’t want and get it." --Eugene Debs (1855-1926), leader of the Socialist Party of America.

Over the weekend, Canada’s major political parties were busy fueling up their leaders’ private jets, polishing up campaign buses, laying out full-page ads and picking out billboard sites. Meanwhile, a myriad of small political parties -- everything from Marxist-Leninist to Libertarian to Natural Law -- were calculating if they could afford to run a campaign, and figuring out how to best use extremely limited resources.

In Canada, as in any ‘liberal democracy,’ the deck is heavily stacked in favour of the rich and powerful in this 36-day sales pitch leading up to the June 28 election. Many voices for social and economic change have been advocating for changes to democratise the political process.

On the eve of the election call, Kimball Cariou of the Communist Party of Canada (CPC) responded to Seven Oaks’ questions about the obstacles facing small parties and the implications of recent changes to the Canada Elections Act.

What are the changes to the Canada Elections Act, recently passed by the Senate into law?

The Senate approved Bill C-3, containing changes to the Elections Act, on May 14. Contrary to earlier indications, the legislation was given royal assent by the Governor General and published quickly enough to allow Elections Canada to implement the new regulations before the writ was dropped on May 23 for a federal election on June 28. The most important change for smaller parties is that the 50-candidate rule to gain full registered status is no longer in effect. As the law stands now, parties need to nominate a minimum of just one candidate to become registered.

With the regulations in effect for this election, what are the benefits for small parties like the CPC?

Small parties are now able to choose how many candidates to nominate, depending on their own capabilities, fundraising abilities, political priorities, etc., and to obtain the benefits of full registered status, instead of going through the onerous and expensive process of nominating at least 50 candidates. The benefits include having the political affiliation of candidates on the ballot (the number needed for this had previously been reduced to 12 following earlier legal victories by the CPC), access to free-time political broadcasts (eight or nine minutes in this election for the CPC), and the right to issue tax receipts for contributors.

The new rules are clearly a victory for small parties. Is the next step to push for proportional representation (PR), allowing people to have their vote make a real impact?

There is clearly a strong demand for PR both at the provincial and federal levels, due to the growing sentiment that "first-past-the-post" elections effectively deny millions of Canadians the right to help elect representatives who reflect their views. But actually, the next step in electoral reform will probably be the legal case launched by the Greens, with the support of other parties, against aspects of the new electoral finance rules. Recent legislation provides public funding to political parties, on the basis of $1.75/year for each vote they receive in the most recent federal election, starting with this one. However, only parties which receive 2% or more of the total vote are eligible for this taxpayer funding. This provision violates the essence of all the legal rulings in the CPC's case against the Election Act, and we fully expect that the provision will be struck down.

What was the original impetus for the CPC to take this to the courts?

We launched our case in September 1993, in response to draconian changes to the Election Act passed by all parties in Parliament earlier that year. Those changes included provisions for seizure of all assets of parties which became de-registered for any reason, such as not running 50 candidates. This provision affected the CPC, which was just emerging from an extended political crisis, since we nominated only 8 candidates in the October 1993 election. It took almost eleven years to finish the case, but we won on every single point, including the seizure rule, the 50 candidate level, and the full return of the $1,000 per candidate deposit to all parties.

How are small and working class parties at a structural disadvantage in the electoral game?

Such parties are denied equal access to free time political broadcasts, which are regulated by the major parties themselves under the terms of the Broadcast Act. The new financing rules turn tens of millions of dollars over to the big parties, while denying any funds to small parties. And of course, the mainstream media does its best to ignore or denigrate parties which stand for the rights of the working class and against capitalism.

Do you see any prospects for regroupment of the numerous leftist parties in Canada, something like the experience of Socialist Alliances in other countries?

The fact that such a regroupment was possible in Quebec is very welcome. The Parti Communiste du Quebec, the Quebec section of the CPC, played an important role in founding and building the Union des Forces Progressistes (Union of Progressive Forces), an alliance of several elements of the left with strong support from some militant unions. Our Party advocates discussion towards such left unity initiatives in English-speaking Canada. We hope that the victories in the Elections Act case can remove some of the barriers to such discussions. Generally speaking, we envision the formation of a People's Coalition which includes left organizations, the labour movement, and other progressive groups, to challenge the big business parties in elections and in the extra-parliamentary arena.

Home Features David and Goliath Stop smirking, Bettman Books this week Essays & Reviews The Big Sellout Operation Filmmaker Salud!