When the new Minister of Democratic Institutions, Karina Gould (No, this is not fake news -- the Trudeau Liberals still do have a minister tasked with democratic institutions) released her mandate letter from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau it read: 

"A clear preference for a new electoral system, let alone a consensus, has not emerged. Furthermore, without a clear preference or a clear question, a referendum would not be in Canada's interest. Changing the electoral system will not be in your mandate."

Read more

Karl Nerenberg is your reporter on the Hill. Please consider supporting his work with a monthly donation Support Karl on Patreon today for as little as $1 per month!

And so that's what strategic voting gets you.

During the last federal election campaign, groups such as Leadnow vigorously encouraged Canadians to vote for the candidates in their ridings with the best chance of defeating the Harper Conservatives. 

I've dedicated a lot of time and energy to understanding and improving how we elect governments in Canada. Yet despite having had more access to Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef than the average Canadian, I feel more confused than ever about what we are to expect from the electoral reform process.

Parliament's Special Committee on Electoral Reform has concluded that a referendum is the best way to determine Canadian public opinion about electoral reform. But the proposition raises many questions that have so far resulted in few answers. Supporters of a referendum have an obligation to show that it can realistically deliver a clear consensus.

Suddenly, though it's news to me, moving from First Past the Post to a different voting system is a really, really fundamental value question for Canadians. Suddenly the House of Commons, entrusted to make decisions about life and death, war and peace, can't be trusted with the largely technical question of how votes are cast and counted.