Skip to main content

Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef appears as a witness at an electoral reform committee on Parliament Hill, July 6, 2016.

Sean Kilpatrick/THE CANADIAN PRESS

The minister in charge of revamping the way Canadians vote in federal elections says she's "yet to be convinced" that a national referendum is the best way to determine whether changes to the electoral system have broad support from the public.

Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef also told a special parliamentary committee set up to study the topic this summer that she looks forward to reviewing its final report and making an "informed decision"– but wouldn't commit to fighting for the committee's recommendations when it comes time to craft legislation at the cabinet table next year.

Instead, Ms. Monsef made her pitch Wednesday as the committee's first witness on why Canada needs to move on from the "antiquated" first-past-the-post voting system to one "that provides a stronger link between the democratic will of Canadians and election results."

Story continues below advertisement

"In the most recent election, less than 40 per cent of those elected were supported by a majority of their constituents, including me," said Ms. Monsef, who was elected as a Liberal MP last year in the Ontario riding of Peterborough-Kawartha with 44 per cent of the vote.

Ms. Monsef called for compromise from the 12 committee members, who include five Liberals, three Conservatives, two New Democrats, one Bloc Québécois MP and the Green Party's Elizabeth May. The Liberals last month backed down from their plan to hold the majority on the committee after facing criticism that they were trying to rig the system in their favour.

"We haven't arrived at a final conclusion. We haven't made up our mind about any given system. I've come to this with an open mind," Ms. Monsef told the committee.

The Conservatives have for weeks been pushing for a referendum on the issue, and the committee's mandate also includes a recommendation for the best way to obtain the views of Canadians.

But Ms. Monsef told the committee that referendums "do not easily lend themselves to effectively deciding complex issues," and pointed out that almost half of eligible voters did not show up to recent referendums on electoral reform. "I believe we need to reach out and engage those who have previously chosen to remain silent," she said, such as new Canadians, indigenous people, youth and those who live in rural and remote communities.

Conservative MP Scott Reid, one of the committee's co-chairs, asked Ms. Monsef whether she would accept holding a referendum if it were recommended by the committee.

"If that is what committee recommends, if that is what you hear from Canadians, if you arrive at a consensus that that is the best way to engage Canadians in 2016, then it is incumbent upon me and this government to take that seriously," Ms. Monsef said.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Reid also asked whether the government was taking any measures to update the federal Referendum Act, which currently applies only to constitutional issues.

"I believe that it is premature to make those changes," Ms. Monsef said. "It's putting the cart before the horse to arrive at a conclusion before you folks have even begun to travel the country."

The committee will hold several meetings throughout the summer in Ottawa, and it's expected to travel the country as well. Ms. Monsef, along with her parliamentary secretary, Mark Holland, will also conduct consultations across Canada. The minister also introduced a guide to electoral reform on Wednesday that is intended to help Canadians set up their own town halls, or "coffee dialogues," on the issue this summer.

The committee will hear from Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand and his predecessor, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, on Thursday. The committee is due to present its final report by Dec. 1.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies