Article content continued

The argument against proportional representation was out there all along, i.e. the current system works fine, PR has many flaws of its own, there was no outcry for reform before the Liberals made it an issue, Canadians still aren’t much interested in the debate, and we could find ourselves with a whole new system that makes decision-making harder and lends undue influence to peripheral voices.

So why didn’t he listen? Did he not want to hear? Had he not done his homework? Or did he figure he could use a majority to slip his preferred alternative — a system of ranking ballots that would favour the Liberals — past Canadians before they realized what had happened?

He says the latter is not the case. “I’m not going near it,” he said Friday of ranked ballots. “I’m not going to do something that everyone is convinced is going to favour one party over another.”

Then why did he promote it in the first place? And if he knew it was unfair, and he’s against proportional representation, and he also doesn’t like first-past-the-post, then what’s he in favour of? There are all sorts variations on PR, some more convoluted than others. It’s possible that, given time, Canadians could have agreed on one of the existing variations, or crafted one of our own. I have my doubts about that, given how national debates have a habit of getting out of hand, but anything is possible.

Every political party makes mistakes, but the Liberals’ handling of this issue leaves the distinct impression that they’re happy to spout important promises on the flimsiest of pretexts, having failed to examine the consequences, thought through the procedures or delve past the shallowest levels of reasoning

It would have required a good deal of patience and education however: first you’d have to get voters’ interest, then you’d have to explain the alternatives, then you’d have to pick a range of options, and finally put it all to a vote. New Zealand spent two years debating and voting on a proposal to change its flag, including two referendums. If a flag justifies two years, an entire electoral overhaul should merit at least as long. But the Liberals let the clock tick away until time became a serious factor, and made it clear they were absolutely opposed to even one referendum, much less two. The fact New Zealanders eventually voted to stick with the flag they already had may have influenced that reluctance, but Trudeau’s refusal to countenance a national vote meant Canadians could have found themselves with a system they didn’t get to choose, design or vote on, pushed through before the next scheduled election for no other reason than Trudeau’s ill-judged, and evidently ill-considered, vow to do so.