If there is one thing everyone can agree on, Canadians’ declining participation in their political system is a cause for concern. Yet there is much less agreement on the best way forward to increase participation again.
Samara’s guest blogger, Mark Dance, makes the case in a three-part series for new innovation outside of the traditional structure of Parliament. He argues for the creation of a “fourth institution of parliament, a kind of ‘Digital House’ in which all Canadians could participate.” Dance envisions an online system to propose and vote on ideas for legislation to be introduced in Parliament. It’s a bold and novel proposal that appeals to an increasingly ‘online’ generation of Canadians already familiar with sites like Digg.com, Reddit.com, or a variety of other internet-voting initiatives.
However, Dale Smith of Hill Queeries, takes opposition with the idea of a Digital House because “it ignores the existing process for policy development – political parties at the riding level.” Smith firmly believes that an individual can achieve change through party channels: “You propose your policy, you build support and help it move to policy conventions, where you again build support and get it made into party policy... Our system does work if you use it properly.”
Yet for Canadians, political parties seem to have lost their appeal. According to survey research, Canadians think joining an interest group is a more effective way of working for political change by a three to one margin (see Howe and Northup 2002). Indeed, in the past decade, at any given point between elections, only 1 to 2 percent of Canadians are estimated to have belonged to a federal political party (see Cross 2004).
Could this mean that the future of political parties is at a tipping point?
Yet today, with two federal party leadership contests underway , recruiting new members is a priority. In a column published in the Toronto Star last month, Chantal Hébert observed, “it is hard to think of a time when Canada’s mainstream parties have been more ripe for the taking.”
If political parties are the real solution to improving participation, who is responsible for steering them in the right direction? At a DiverseCity panel discussion co-hosted by Maytree and Toronto’s Civic Action last night, Robin Sears, an international communications and public affairs consultant, asserted that local party associations are “paper tigers” – they are not hard to ‘take over’ if you mobilize enough support. However, he also noted that few people outside of parties – especially groups prone to underrepresentation in politics to begin with – know how to “navigate the game.”
So, who leads the change? Should Canadians push parties to be more participatory, inclusive and responsive to what they are looking for out of membership? Or do parties, given their uniquely central role in our democracy, have an obligation to reach out to non-member Canadians and give them a reason to join? Moreover, are we missing other opportunities like Dance’s “Digital House” if we’re focused on political parties?
***
Howe, Paul and David Northup. 2002. Strengthening Canadian Democracy: The views of Canadians. Policy Matters series vol. 1, no. 5. Ottawa: Institute for Research on Public Policy.
Cross, William. 2004. Political Parties. Vancouver: UBC Press.