OwlEye

Voter Apathy and the Political Process

This is an article written during the 2004 Canadian Federal Election in an effort to escape the mind-numbing campaign that was being run by all the major parties. Though inspired by the events of that election, as well as prior research done on the subject, it was designed to consider elections generally, rather than that specific instance.

I do not intend to post more then a few old articles that I have written, and only do so right now to provide some content until I can start putting together new ideas and doing so regularily. Until then, I may throw in some older material, though only if I feel it is still relevant and interesting. As always, I hope you enjoy.

---

Voter Apathy and the Political Process (June 26, 2004)

It is clear that Canadians are unhappy about politics, as we watch the current electoral campaign play out against a backdrop of anger and cynicism about the trustworthiness and legitimacy of our politicians. This is not a recent phenomenon, and it cannot be simply explained by pointing to the scandals of the recent past, or any other single event. Voter turnout has been dropping steadily for the past forty years, while voter cynicism has been on the rise for about the same period. As such, it seems that no event or group of events could explain this type of decline. Instead, the most likely reason for this rising dissatisfaction is the evolution of Canadian society. As communication technology has improved, and as levels of education have risen, Canadian society has developed away from our Confederation-era political system, including both the party and electoral systems. These systems no longer serve our needs.

What are the political needs of Canadians? This, I believe, is the fundamental question facing our politicians and country today. The present representative system only allows Canadians to participate once every four years in the decision-making process of their country, with the opportunity to choose between competing platforms, competing candidates, competing leaders, competing parties, all with a single X on their ballot. For an increasingly politically conscious society, this is no longer sufficient, and it is only through reform of the policy development process that Canadians can be given an adequate voice in their future.

Policy development is an insulated process, taking place away from the eyes and ears of average Canadians. While parties set the broad outlines of what is acceptable, it is the internal leadership circles that design the specific electoral policy for elections. These groups are independent of both the caucus and party members meaning that very few Canadians have access to the electoral agenda, while the rest must simply react to what leaders believe they want to hear. This is evident when several Conservative MPs stray from Stephen Harper’s moderate party line, or when the Liberal Campaign chooses to focus on health care rather than fiscal management, against the wishes of many in the party.

Taken further, it seems that many of these policies are not even meant to be kept. Because they are developed for the purpose of fighting an election, they are weapons, designed to attract votes, not to be implemented. Giving as much to as many people as possible is good strategy, but as promises, they are difficult to keep once the party becomes a government. It should surprise nobody that these promises are often not kept, especially when there are five years for a government to repair the damage. This problem is especially insidious, as any party fighting an election with such policies forces the others to do the same in order to be able to compete. The system, as it exists, compels parties towards dishonest policy, and undermines political credibility. This is not a positive way for parties to develop policy.

The solution is simple. Policy development must be broad-based and accessible to the public at large; it should not be merely the election platforms of individual leaders. Extensive public consultation for legislation is one way to do this, while engaging party members in policy debates via the internet is another. Parties should develop policy outside of elections, which can then be used as their platform. If we are to reinvigorate Canadian democracy, there must be a debate about ideas, and this can only happen if the ideas on the agenda are heartfelt, honest, and practical. Reform of the system is possible, as is restoring trust in our politicians, and faith in the process, but this will only occur if Canadians are engaged in decision-making at a much deeper level than they are now. We are capable of this as citizens, but we need the opportunity to prove it.

---

posted by MattyJ @ 4:30 AM