Fed up with politics as usual? Most Canadians are, and an overwhelming eighty-three percent want their MP to represent them-not a party-in the House of Commons. Without pressure from the people, however, political parties won't consider fundamental reforms to give power back to the people.

In Power Shift, author Vaughan Lyon draws on his years of experience as a party activist and political scientist to delve into why and how Canadian political reform must occur. He explores Canadians' desire for a different form of representation-constituency representation-based on citizen participation in making policy and electing MPs.

Lyon presents a detailed model of the new politics, shows how its adoption will improve the responsiveness of government, and outlines how it can be organized responsibly at little cost. He also explains how this model would establish the close collaborative relationship of citizens, their MPs, and government and civil servants, a bond essential for the government to meet challenges and rise to Canada's great opportunities.

Conditions are ripe for change, and the time for Canadians to wrest control of their MPs from political parties is now.

"That the political systems of the democratic world, and the institutions which channel political life in Canada and elsewhere, are in trouble will surprise no one. Vaughan Lyon's contribution to the agonised introspection triggered by that crisis is distinguished by the comprehensiveness of his critique and its accompanying thesis that piecemeal tinkering or adhockery cannot provide the transformative change that is required.

"Very little emerges unscathed from his probing and well-documented critique. ... His prime focus is the party system, isolated by party discipline in the legislature from the citizenry it is supposed to serve. The thesis that parties are instruments of democratic citizenship is 'the great delusion.' In fact they are 'a barrier to a twenty-first-century democracy.'

"... Vaughan Lyon's goal is an empowered citizenry, the necessary support for the strengthened government needed to grapple with twenty-first century challenges. The alienation of citizens from government is to be reversed with government 'firmly rooted in the citizenry.' ... Professor Lyon advocates a 'quiet Canadian democratic revolution.' He invites the reader to accompany him on the path to that future."

-Alan Cairns, past president of the Canadian Political Science Association

POWER SHIFT

From Party Elites to Informed CitizensBy Vaughan Lyon

iUniverse, Inc.

Copyright © 2011 Vaughan Lyon
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4620-3763-6

Contents

Foreword............................................................................................ixPreface.............................................................................................xi1. The Alternative to Party Representation and Government...........................................12. Citizens Systematically Under-Represented, Misrepresented, and "Dumbed Down".....................273. Prime Ministerial Misrule........................................................................534. Partyocracy: Courting Bankruptcy.................................................................725. Partyocracy as Government........................................................................926. Party Administration: Neutral and Professional?..................................................1347. Parties: Agents of National Disunity.............................................................1578. Patching Partyocracy: Delaying True Representative Democracy.....................................2019. Parties on the Public Payroll: Democratic Reform?................................................24810. The Great Delusion: Parties as Vehicles for Democratic Citizenship..............................26611. On the Cusp of True Democratic Representation...................................................292References..........................................................................................303Acknowledgments.....................................................................................320

Chapter One

The Alternative to Party Representation and Government

Policy Democracy Based on Constituency Parliaments

Imagining alternatives can be tough.

Rick Salutin

The prime difficulty ... is that of discovering the means by which a scattered, mobile, and manifest society may so recognize itself as to define and express its interests.

John Dewey

What we call necessary institutions are often no more than institutions to which we have grown accustomed ... in matters of social constitution, the field of possibilities is much more extensive than men living in the various societies are ready to imagine.

Alexis de Tocqueville

Introduction: An Overview of Constituency Parliaments

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, we finally won the universal right to elect our representatives to the House of Commons and, in doing so, to indirectly choose who and what party would govern. Now it is urgent that we take the next step to a fuller democracy, one where citizens will participate directly with their elected leaders in determining the policies the government will adopt. This participation requires an institution that will fill the space—now unsatisfactorily occupied by parties—between citizens and those we elect. Ideally, this institution should create a close working relationship between us, our elected representatives, the governments they form, and the civil service. We can create such an institution. It would be quite simple in structure and modest in cost. The difficulty in establishing it lies in mobilizing the strong (but still only latent) support for constituency representation. We have been socialized into leaving politics to the politicians, but we must now assume responsibility ourselves for fundamental changes in the system. Our politicians will not make them without a strong push from us.

Canadians are now alienated from politics and politicians, feeling powerless in a system purporting to be a democracy. The importance of that alienation is not to be ignored, downplayed, or finessed. It lowers our support for government. That, in turn, has a negative impact on the administration's desire and ability to serve our interests.

The most impressive contemporary evidence supporting the desire of Canadians for a new politics was provided by the Citizens' Forum on Canadian Unity (the Spicer Commission) appointed by Conservative PM Brian Mulroney. After listening to thousands of Canadians from coast to coast, it summarized our views this way: "Since election campaigns do not constitute a vote by the people on ... policies, and since elected representatives seem to have little or no influence or freedom to represent constituents' views, there is a perceived need for mechanisms which will (a) require members of parliament to consult their constituents on major issues; and, (b) either give them more freedom, or require them to vote according to their constituents' wishes. A group in Ontario reflected the consensus of most Forum discussions in reporting: "The government must be changed. We must have a system whereby our elected representatives truly represent and reflect the wishes of their constituents."

It cannot be argued that only reform-minded people were heard by the Commission and that the "silent majority" is satisfied with the existing representative system. As already noted, polling and party promises have, for at least the past century, also reflected the desire of Canadians to have their representatives carry forward their views to the House of Commons, i.e., to have constituency rather than party representation. Even elected MPs and party candidates for office agree, by overwhelming majorities, that they should be allowed to represent the views of their constituents in the Commons.

Our preference for that mode of representation has been ignored or merely exploited by our political leaders, however. No serious thought has been given to how constituency representation might be organized, because it is not in the interests of the parties monopolizing political life to consider alternatives to their dominance. That institution has been allowed to dictate to us!

How legitimate or worthy of our support can government be when it is based on a (party) system of representation that lacks the support of the overwhelming majority of its citizens? Who does the political system belong to—the people whom it claims to serve, or the tiny group of political practitioners working inthe system?

To initiate our consideration of moving Canada to a higher level of democracy, I will present a viable, responsible model embracing the constituency representation we want and need. The model would enable citizens to direct, as well as elect, their governments, taking that power away from parties and, in particular, their leaders. Adoption of the model would institute policy democracy. This advanced form of democracy would be based on the constituency parliaments described below.

I might be expected to conclude the book, after considering all the reasons why the existing system of representation must be democratized, with this description of constituency parliaments. That order is reversed for an important reason. The parties have, as mentioned, convinced many that they are inevitable. If this belief is not effectively challenged by showing how representation could be organized without parties, it would be difficult for many people to accept my critique of their performance. What would be the point of doing so if we believe that we must have them and, especially, if we feel the features of the party objected to are largely beyond reform?

On the other hand, if we consider the functioning of the existing system with a practical alternative to it in mind, we can assess its current performance against that alternative. At the end of this comparative assessment, we should be able to conclude whether the old or the new would best serve our interests. If the new represents enormous political progress, as I hope to show, then the issue remaining is how do we bring about change to constituency representation? I address that in the final chapter.

The model set out below will, of course, be denounced as impractical, as pie in the sky, by those who have a vested interest in the existing system. Others, lacking that interest, may still find the model outside the range of changes they are used to discussing. I hope, however, that all Canadians who feel alienated by the current system and who would like to participate in building a more democratic political system supporting a more efficient and responsive government—for themselves and for future generations—will approach the model with an open mind. If we were free of the past and constructing a democratic system from scratch for today, wouldn't it look very much like the one described below?

Requisites of a Realistic Proposal for Empowering Citizens

Constituency representation must meet three conditions to be successful. First, there must be an elected body of citizens in a constituency who can legitimately claim to represent their neighbours. This body would establish (aggregate) the majority viewpoint of those neighbours on policy issues of particular interest to them. Their MP would then carry these views forward to the House of Commons, converting what is now an increasingly discredited party battleground into a forum of MPs representing citizens.

Second, the constituency viewpoint reached in deliberations of the body representing the citizens in a constituency must be informed, so that it is worthy of respect and representation by the MP. Third, the citizens elected by their neighbours to represent them in the local parliament would be expected to accept responsibility for the consequences flowing from their contribution to public policy—responsibility would accompany empowerment.

These three conditions cannot be met by party MPs holding occasional town-hall meetings, circulating questionnaires, or even sponsoring constituency-wide referenda. A substantive majority viewpoint can only be determined in the deliberations of elected representatives of constituents who have full access to relevant information and the time to deliberate on it. There must be a new institution to facilitate the deliberations.

Constituency Parliaments: An Overview

Let it be clear that I am not proposing immediate full participatory democracy. To move from a system where one person, i.e., the prime minister, dominates government to one where everybody participates extensively on an ongoing basis in setting public policy is unrealistic. The idea is a "straw-man" advanced only to discredit the idea of significantly increased participation. But it is both realistic and necessary to significantly extend participation to include a "base" of elected citizens to deliberate on issues and determine the majority's view on them. Formal citizen participation has not been expanded since the universal franchise was established in the l920s and never beyond voting. There is a mismatch between that record, the rapid expansion of government in the last century, and a concentration of power in the office of the prime minister. We "grow" centralized government but not citizen participation.

I am advocating establishing a network of elected constituency parliaments (CPs), one in each of Canada's 308 constituencies. It would be the key representative and deliberative institution that would make constituency representation possible. The members of each CP, working closely with the constituency's member of the House of Commons, would develop a majority position on the issues on which they want to be heard. The MP would then represent those views in the Commons and, on most occasions (see below), support them with his or her vote if that opportunity presents itself.

Local deliberation on national and international issues, plus the ability of any citizen to seek election to the local parliament, or influence its members, would fundamentally alter our system of representation. A citizen-excluding system would become citizen-inclusive. Policy direction would predominantly flow up from us to our leadership, rather than down, as is currently the case. The change is indicated in these diagrams.

A major barrier to the adoption of constituency representation will be the lack of trust that many of us now have in the political judgment of our fellow citizens. Some now think of our quite conservative, dominant middle class in 19th-century terms—as a potentially dangerous mob that, given more power and responsibility, would threaten our liberties or take from the rich to give to the poor. We should credit most of our neighbours with being responsible and trust that the views of their elected local representatives, formulated in the deliberations of the constituency parliaments, would be well informed. As an integral part of the national policy-making and governing team, the CP members would have a strong incentive, indeed obligation, to master the issues being discussed locally. John Stuart Mill made the case for responsibility stimulating social learning when the right to vote was being extended in his time:

He [the citizen] is called upon, while so engaged, to weigh interests not his own; to be guided, in case of conflicting claims, by another rule than his own private partialities; to apply at every turn principles and maxims which have for their reason of existence the common good; and he usually finds associated with him in the same work minds more familiarized than his own with these ideas and operations, whose study it will be to supply reasons to his understanding and stimulate his feeling for the general interest.

Constituency Parliaments: Features

Elections. Members of constituency parliaments would be elected in each riding on the basis of one constituency parliament member for every thousand voters. The local assemblies would, therefore, on average, have approximately one hundred members. They would be elected from wards—the neighbourhoods making up the constituency. The timing of the election of members—whether they would be held separately from or concurrent with general elections—and other details, while important, could be decided when CPs are established.

Participation and socialization. In the 2011 general election, there were roughly 24 million registered voters. On the basis of one representative per thousand registered voters, establishing constituency parliaments would create formal positions for 24,000 constituency parliamentarians meeting in their constituencies. Overtime, the normal turn over of members would result in a substantial body of citizens with constituency parliament experience. The very real possibility would exist that, at some point in his or her life, an interested citizen could play a formal political role in local parliament. The constituency parliaments could promote still wider involvement by appointing committees of non-members to assist in their review of policy issues. Experts on many of the subjects dealt with in parliament live in most constituencies and could have a voice on public policy through their local CP. A study group on foreign policy at the local community centre would, for example, have a significant place where it could express its members' views. They would probably find parliament too geographically remote, inaccessible, and intimidating to carry their views to its members.

With constituency parliaments in place, issues that now seem beyond the control of the ordinary citizen would be brought home with deliberation in the CPs. People would be encouraged to consider the relevance of national and international matters to their lives and to develop informed opinions about them. Further, the political content of the local news media and the new media, i.e., the Internet, would spark higher levels of activity from community-based interest groups as they reported on the constituency parliament sessions.

Citizens who now consider issues in isolation from others would be brought together to exchange views in the CPs. In an era when newspaper readership and party membership is declining, and cocooning is becoming increasingly common, institutions that bring people into face-to-face contact are needed more than ever to build social solidarity and expand the perspectives of individuals.

In addition to increasing local political involvement, constituency parliaments would add balance to the representation of political interests because its members would be elected from wards within the constituency. Since they often live in the same neighbourhood, citizens of low socioeconomic status and ethnic minorities, now grossly under-represented at all levels of government, could be elected to CPs and gain a voice on public policy.

Women, another under-represented group, would be given significant additional opportunities for political participation. Government would be "brought home" for politically engaged women. They would not have to go to Ottawa to participate significantly in making national policy. Women have proven themselves skilful at organizing locally, and they might easily be the dominant gender in most constituency parliaments, balancing off male domination of the House of Commons.

Establishing constituency parliaments would do far more to empower women than enfranchising them did in the 1920s. The unsatisfactory attempt to deal with the issue of increasing female representation in the House of Commons politics by establishing quotas for their representation could be abandoned.

Retired and young persons, an enormous untapped reservoir of experience and energy, might also find membership in a constituency parliament practical and attractive. Aboriginal persons, perhaps the most difficult group of Canadians to engage in the formal political system, would also have more access to government through constituency parliaments.

Many constituency parliament members could come from the ranks of those who are already politically engaged but in ways they find unsatisfactory and limiting. Those citizens deserve a more personally satisfying role in the policy-making process than their membership in parties and in interest groups offer.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from POWER SHIFTby Vaughan Lyon Copyright © 2011 by Vaughan Lyon. Excerpted by permission of iUniverse, Inc.. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.