4mo ago

Reminder that the Liberal Party broke Canadian's trust, and are still slated to form government in 2025. Do we even care about accountability or integrity anymore?

The image is an infographic titled "The Liberal's Broken Promise: Electoral Reform" that displays a vertical timeline with colored dots and information boxes chronicling electoral reform events in Canada.

The timeline shows six key events:

June 2015 (pink dot): Campaign Promise - Justin Trudeau pledges: "We are committed to ensuring the 2015 election will be the last election using first-past-the-post."
October 2015 (blue dot): Election Victory - Liberals win a majority government with 39.5% of the popular vote, securing 184 seats (54% of the House of Commons).
June 2016 (light blue dot): Special Committee Created - The Electoral Reform Committee (ERRE) is established to study options. The committee conducts consultations across Canada.
December 2016 (red dot): Committee Recommendations - The ERRE recommends proportional representation. 88% of electoral experts consulted favoured proportional representation.
February 2017 (blue dot): Promise Abandoned - PM Trudeau abandons electoral reform, claiming "no consensus" despite clear committee recommendations and public consultations.
October 2024 (black dot): Looking Back - Trudeau admits he should have "immediately shut down talk about proportional representation" and that Liberals were "deliberately vague."

Below the timeline is a "Key Statistics" box showing:

63% of voters cast ballots for parties promising electoral reform
80% of town hall participants asked for proportional representation
71% wanted parties to govern together

The infographic includes a Creative Commons license icon in the bottom left corner and a QR code in the bottom right. The footer cites sources: House of Commons Special Committee on Electoral Reform, Fair Vote Canada, Policy Options.

27 comments

The prospect of a madman pushing annexation and meeting lukewarm opposition from a career politician whose only argument is this exact argument doesn't give anyone the warm fuzzies.
Was Trudeau's tenure a roaring success? Doesn't matter, that's yesterday's news .
- Agreed. I'll take a party that broke our trust over a party that wants to break our country.
  Sadly, there is not a realistic 3rd option at this time.
  
  I get the frustration, I really do. But look, there are actually other options out there - NDP🟧, Greens🟢, and Bloc⚜️ all support proportional representation.
  The thing is, this feeling that we only have two choices? That's exactly what our First-Past-The-Post system wants us to believe. It's working as designed. Canada's effective number of parties has already shrunk to 2.76 - we're literally sliding toward that American two-party nightmare thanks to Duverger's Law.
  Every time we hold our noses and vote strategically for parties that have zero interest in fixing the system, we're just keeping this broken cycle going.
  Your vote is yours. It doesn't "belong" to either of the big parties by default. And honestly, if you're voting for a party that refuses to fix our democracy, that's when your vote is truly wasted.
- While I appreciate the point about immediate geopolitical concerns, I'd argue that our democratic weaknesses make us more vulnerable to external threats, not less.
  A country that is governed by its people, and truly so with proportional representation, is the strongest force there can be against an authoritarian takeover. It provides true and uncompromising democratic legitimacy to the government -- as a healthy democracy demands.
  This isn't just about Trudeau - it's about a pattern across Liberal leadership (since Mackenzie King in 1919) of promising proportional representation then abandoning it once in power. Now Mark Carney continues this tradition with his non-committal stance on electoral reform despite his economic expertise.
  The timing is actually perfect for this discussion. When facing external threats, we need a strong, legitimate democracy where every Canadian's vote counts. Our current system regularly allows minority governments to rule for the majority, creating democratic vulnerabilities that potential adversaries can exploit.
  The solution to threats isn't less democracy - it's making our democracy stronger through proportional representation. That's not yesterday's news; it's tomorrow's national security.
  
  We're facing a very real threat to our very existence. Splitting the votes in the middle and left will only guarantee that the conservatives win.
  Also, I don't trust anyone who won't get security clearance, seriously what is he hiding?
- I hear you on leadership frustrations - that's completely valid. But I think we're conflating two different issues here.
  Electoral systems are separate from party leadership. The beauty of proportional representation is that it actually gives voters more power to hold parties accountable, not less.
  Under PR systems like STV, you could vote for NDP candidates you respect while avoiding Singh if you wanted. Or support certain Green candidates but not May. That's because PR gives voters more nuanced choices rather than forcing all-or-nothing decisions.
  The current winner-take-all system is precisely what traps us with leadership we don't fully support. It forces us to accept entire party packages because our electoral districts only elect one representative.
  I'm not asking you to support any particular leader - I'm suggesting we fix the system that limits our choices. With PR, we'd have more parties, more diverse voices, and more accountability for leaders who aren't performing.
  What if you could vote your actual preferences instead of being trapped in this system that makes us settle?
Also see: Simple things you can do right now, to grow the proportional representation movement—so we never have to vote for the lesser of the evils, have a two party system, "split the vote", or strategic vote.
I have such a bad feeling about Carney. This is classic Shock Doctrine shit. Our collective attention is so focused on this one totally engineered thing that may or may not even be real. We are unable to protect ourselves, and we are at risk of being severely exploited no matter who wins.

27 comments