Election 2008: Where are we now?

After our $300 million exercise in democracy and citizenship this fall, it’s important to assess the impact of the federal election. What did Election 2008 achieve? Where are we now? And how are we called to respond?

When this election was called, there was a lot of cynicism: how much was really going to change? Polls weren’t showing significant changes in voter preferences from the last election, and it generally seemed like no party was capturing the public imagination.

In fact, fewer than 30 seats changed hands between parties, and we found ourselves with an almost identical Conservative government. The policy direction of the country seemed essentially unchanged.

The advocacy context also seemed largely the same, although the Liberal leadership race, Parliamentary processes and political manoeuvrings may offer some interesting dynamics to our nation’s federal political scene.

The impact of this election
It seemed tempting to believe in the days following the election that the whole process didn’t make any difference. But in reality, there were some big issues and disturbing trends in both the campaign and its results.

The most shocking trend is the lowest voter turnout in Canadian history. At 59.1%, more than one-third of eligible voters chose not to cast a ballot. It appears there were a variety of reasons for this appallingly low turnout, but such a significant challenge to our democracy’s health means we need to have conversations about our political culture and citizen engagement.

The increased profile given to strategic voting and vote swapping during the campaign, as people used Facebook and dedicated strategic voting websites to plan or swap their vote, also seems noteworthy. Together with the low voter turnout, it clearly suggests that the time has come to consider electoral reform. Our electoral system is leaving many Canadians feeling disengaged and disenfranchised.

This is compounded by the fact that over 60% of Canadian voters did not vote for the Conservatives. The current system stifles desire for change and limits capacity to address issues except in a narrow, partisan way.

The incremental gains made in representation by women and visible minorities show the challenges they face in our electoral system. While we have a record number of female MPs, there was an increase of only four seats from the last parliament, to a total of 22% of the House of Commons. Visible minorities are similarly represented at a rate well below their proportion of the population.

The slow, difficult progress made by women and visible minorities in achieving gains in representation also points to the option of electoral reform. But perhaps it is also time to consider other methods of facilitating equality, such as quotas for candidates or tying public financing to a party’s records on including and supporting women and visible minorities.

What happened to the issues?
The ways in which big issues were dealt with – or not dealt with at all – during the campaign also raises questions about the future health of Canadian democracy.

For the first time in Canadian history, the environment was an election issue. At the beginning of the campaign, voters named the environment as one of the three biggest issues they were concerned about in an Angus Reid poll. However, the environment ultimately didn’t seem to affect the outcome, falling victim to the focus on the economy.

Will this affect whether the environment is addressed by political parties in future campaigns? Do political parties believe Canadians will not vote according to their concerns about the environment? Did Canadians opt only for regulation of carbon emissions, or will we see cap-and-trade or carbon taxes resurface as policy options?

Similarly, poverty and other social concerns did not seem to be issues at all, though several political party platforms explicitly committed to action. Poverty was not even addressed in the leaders’ debates. Does this say to political parties that Canadians will not vote according to poverty and other social issues, but only on short-term economic self-interest?

This election saw some political parties avoiding public debates, refusing to send candidates or not responding to public questions. Other parties were explicitly excluded: only after citizens and organizations like CPJ challenged the exclusion of the Green Party were they included in the leaders’ debates. How do we encourage genuine debate and democratic dialogue that allows voters to participate and truly understand their options in this context?

When the media focuses on trivialities like gaffes or puffin poop, how do we encourage Canadians to understand and engage with serious issues?

How do we respond to these outcomes of our election and the way they will shape our future?

The role of CPJ
CPJ’s vision is a world in which individuals, communities, societal institutions and governments all contribute to and benefit from the common good. Voter disengagement, cynicism, marginalized voices, inattention to key public justice issues, and lack of serious political debate all challenge this vision.

In this context, CPJ’s role seems important more than ever. Canadians need to be encouraged to participate in public dialogue about the big issues, what kind of country we want, and what kind of citizens we want to be. Our desire is to help citizens engage in elections in meaningful ways, and communicate with their decision makers and each other between elections.

As Canadians, we need to be thinking of big picture questions of who we are and where we can go together as a country. We must reflect on our core values, dream about our common future, and articulate our aspirations to our leaders. We must ask how we can inculcate our political involvement with values of justice, care and compassion for each other and for creation.

At CPJ, one of our goals is to empower citizens to participate in public debate by helping them stay informed on important public justice issues and key policy debates. We provide opportunities to engage in direct advocacy, like our Envisioning Canada Without Poverty campaign. And our new advocacy toolkit offers guidance on how to take action.

We also serve as a voice for our members in the political sphere, reminding politicians and decision makers to address important issues in a respectful, democratic and just way. Focusing on short-term electoral advantage is a dangerous habit for our common life together.

We speak out in the media. During the election campaign, we received an average of three media hits per week, commenting on the campaign and highlighting public justice issues.

Finally, we offer Canadians a space to engage in conversations for the common good. Canadians need to share their views, be challenged and inspired by others, dream together, know when to be prophetic and when to compromise.

Canadians don’t all hold the same beliefs, values, policy goals or priorities, and neither do Christians. Part of citizenship engagement is being willing to debate, ready to teach but willing to learn. Our new website provides a space for that kind of participation, with a new blog, community forum, and the opportunity for you to post comments.

Although an important element of our country’s life together, elections are only one part of the public policy process. The hard work of dialogue, education and advocacy takes place between elections.

This recent election highlights important concerns about our country’s future that need to be dealt with now. Electoral reform, environmental devastation, confronting major social issues like poverty, the importance of democratic dialogue and participation – all of these issues should not fade from the political forum now that the election has passed.

CPJ will continue to educate Canadians on poverty and advocate for a poverty reduction strategy, to explore alternatives like the Guaranteed Livable Income, to critique important structures like the tax system, to encourage fairness and welcome for newcomers, to support the rights of Aboriginals, to promote environmental care, and to challenge and encourage Canadians to be good neighbours in the midst of diversity.