Skip to content
Click on cover to enlarge
Politics

How to Save Democracy

«  page 2 of 4  »

The system is ailing and the disease is cynicism. Perhaps the time has come for a radical new treatment

by Allan Gregg

Illustration by Leif Parsons

Published in the September 2004 issue.  » BUY ISSUE     

          Facebook         Stumble      Get The Walrus on your Blackberry or Windows Mobile        RSS


How can this cycle be reversed?

We know from experience what hasn’t worked.

Public-relations campaigns have been launched to encourage young people to vote. Limits and constraints that narrow their discretionary latitude have been heaped upon our leaders. Exhortations for a better calibre of individual to heed the call of public life are heard around boardroom tables throughout the land.

Far from reversing or diminishing our cynicism, however, these efforts have had no effect and, in some instances, have served to exacerbate and reinforce our mistrust.

Despite these efforts, voter turnout has continued to drop; in the June federal election, it was 60.3 percent, the lowest since 1898.

What hasn’t been tried, but is often suggested, is a structural change in our political and electoral system as the panacea for reducing the “democratic deficit.” Advocates of proportional representation, for example, claim it would more accurately mirror popular support. However, an electoral system that rewards small and regional parties might produce instability by granting too great a voice to special-and single-interest groups that would drown out appeals for a broader public good.

Similarly, it is argued that more free votes and a greater role for individual Members of Parliament would give local representatives more authority and the licence to reflect their own views, thereby giving them a more distinctive profile and accountability with their constituents. The problem is that, if we are to maintain stability in government, MPs cannot vote consistently against Cabinet, and Cabinet members certainly cannot vote against their colleagues.

These suggestions never go beyond the suggestion stage for good reason: our system of parliamentary and responsible government has evolved over centuries; reforms such as these, introduced piecemeal, could undermine the entire structure.

The key to revitalizing democracy must rest on two foundations: giving citizens and their leaders a more intimate understanding of one another by bringing the two into closer proximity; and providing real evidence that citizens’ efforts to affect the system can actually bear fruit.

In fact, everything I know about public opinion and the working of governments tells me that if we truly want to create a more cohesive and workable democracy, then we must make both structural and systemic changes aimed at elites, as well as cultural changes aimed at the masses.

Comments

Comment on this article


Will not be displayed on the site

Submit a comment online

Submit a letter to the Editor


    Cancel

GET THE WALRUS NEWSLETTER