First, we want to say a huge thank you to the thousands of supporters who registered as Liberals during the federal Liberal leadership race to send a strong message to the candidates about proportional representation.
Over the past six weeks, you chipped in for a national poll showing that 68% of Canadians back proportional representation—only 19% are opposed—and a strong majority want the next Prime Minister to champion it.
You sent personal emails to the leadership candidates, you asked the Liberal Party to include a question about electoral reform in the debates, and you showed up in person at local events across the country to speak to the candidates.
As a grassroots citizens’ movement for proportional representation, we knew it wouldn’t be easy to make our voices heard.
Over 400,000 Canadians are eligible to vote for the new candidate who will be the next Prime Minister.
Leadership candidates had to raise large sums of money quickly to be in the race, favouring candidates who already had deep ties to the party, which usually means those with a long record of defending Justin Trudeau’s broken promise on electoral reform.
The biggest challenge of all for our campaign was the relentless crisis generated by the Trump Presidency. The front runners in this leadership race have been laser focused on how they would deal with the economy and Donald Trump.
In the face of tough odds, you stepped up in a big way. Together we made a difference for proportional representation!
Voting starts on February 26.
As you prepare to cast your vote, here’s what we know about where they stand on proportional representation:
Mark Carney
Mark Carney has not made any public statement about proportional representation. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can quote in the future or no public commitment we can build on.
Nevertheless, we’d like to share with you the reports that have come to us from 1-1 conversations people have had with Mark Carney at local events.
In chronological order, from the beginning of the race until now:
“I also asked his opinion on proportional representation. He asked if I wanted an honest answer. I said yes. He said he hadn’t thought about it.”
“I asked him about electoral reform, and he said he is open-minded and has “no priors” on the issue (no history of a position before). I asked him about a citizens’ assembly, and he said he liked citizens’ assemblies.”
“When I met Mark Carney and asked him how he felt about electoral reform he said “You’re the third person who’s asked me about that today. I’m open to it”.
“I went to Mark Carney’s meeting and asked his view on PR. He said he’s in favour but doesn’t think the leader should postulate on which system is best. However, he says there are more pressing issues right now.”
“He said this issue has been brought up a lot as he meets with Liberals across the country. He said he didn’t have a specific position on which improved electoral system would be best, but knows this is an issue.”
“I eventually squeezed my way to the front of the swarm, shook his hand, and said, “I know it’s not a top priority, but I’m in favour of proportional representation….” He then said he thinks the Prime Minister should not have an entrenched idea of the right system, or words to that effect.”
Bottom line:
Mark Carney has not said anything public about electoral reform, but he is consistently telling people he is open-minded, and that he does not think the Prime Minister’s view should decide the issue. Both of these opinions are a marked break from Justin Trudeau. It’s encouraging that he says he’s been hearing about this issue from Liberals across the country.
Chrystia Freeland
A supporter wrote to tell us:
“I asked her about her position on electoral reform/proportional representation. Her answer was that the Liberal party lost credibility over that. As a result, she didn’t believe it would be helpful to make it part of this election cycle’s platform. She said perhaps it could be part of a subsequent campaign.”
We have not received any other reports of conversations with Chrystia Freeland.
We have heard that when people asked a question about electoral reform at her online town hall, the moderators ignored that question, even when several people were asking about it:
Bottom line:
Based on the only report we got, Chrystia Freeland’s words on this issue are consistent with the Liberal Party’s approach since Trudeau broke his promise in February 2017. They look at the issue as something that did political damage to their brand, so the issue is a political liability they would rather ignore.
Freeland was part of the Cabinet which defended the broken promise and part of the Cabinet that helped defeat a motion for a non-partisan National Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform in February 2024.
This leadership race was a chance for Chrystia Freeland to differentiate herself from Justin Trudeau on electoral reform, but she has chosen not to do so.
Karina Gould
Very early in the leadership race, a person whom we consider a very credible source told us about a conversation with Karina in which Karina said she did not support proportional representation for the House of Commons. She would support a Citizens’ Assembly, but any electoral reform must go to a referendum.
We had hoped to hear something more hopeful from Karina during the leadership race.
Last week, Karina was asked on the Ryan Jespersen show if she would fulfill the promise broken by Justin Trudeau and she stated:
– “I don’t have an intellectual argument against a Citizens’ Assembly.”
– “We were kind of naive. Putting together a Parliament committee to study it and come up with a plan just evolved into partisanship.”
– “My plan would be, let’s have a Citizens’ Assembly. Then let’s put it to a referendum to make sure Canadians are on board with it. “
She repeated these points during a February 24 interview with Paul Wells.
Karina Gould was the Minister of Democratic Institutions in 2017, tasked with announcing the government’s decision to break its promise on electoral reform.
She defended that decision countless times the following years, repeating government’s talking points in favour of first-past-the-post and their excuses for breaking their promise. (If you don’t know the history, see our blog “Was there no consensus?”).
Karina was also part of the Cabinet that voted against a non-partisan Citizens’ Assembly in February 2024.
Karina’s current position in favour of a referendum is deeply concerning.
During the federal electoral reform process in 2016, the Conservative Party spent over 85% of their time on electoral reform in the House of Commons demanding a referendum—a tactic created and championed by their former Democratic Reform Minister, Pierre Poilievre. Of the 228 questions asked by the Conservatives on electoral reform, 195 repeated Poilievre’s referendum talking point.
The reasons for this are clear: referendums are not only divisive, they are easily overrun by highly effective misinformation campaigns and hugely biased towards the status quo.
Research from around the world shows that in an environment of low information and misinformation, voter decisions in a referendum are based largely on partisanship and cues from political leaders (who are generally opposed to the reform).
In OECD countries, 80% of which use proportional systems, achieving proportional representation by referendum is extremely rare.
In almost every successful transition to PR, negotiation and compromise through a multi-party agreement was the key.
(To learn more, you can watch our webinar from a few years ago on referendums or the one on multi-party agreements).
The majority of experts who testified to the federal electoral committee in 2016 agreed that a referendum was the wrong way to proceed on electoral reform.
As Professor Yasmin Dawood told the committee:
“A referendum is not a politically neutral choice.”
Professor Nelson Wiseman was blunter:
“It’s unnecessary, it’s a waste of money, and it will almost certainly fail. You may as well recommend not changing the system and save Canadians the cost.”
Bottom line:
Making progress towards proportional representation requires doing the hard work of finding common ground between parties to create a strong mandate for change. Karina’s insistence on a referendum is more likely to kill reform efforts for a very long time than achieve any progress, and does not suggest that she is a supporter of proportional representation.
Frank Baylis
Frank Baylis has not said anything publicly about proportional representation, and we are unaware of any opinions he may have.
Baylis did release a plan for other democratic reforms, including giving MPs more opportunity to debate and citizens the ability to force debates through petitions.
With 12 days left in the race, it’s not too late for any of the candidates to publicly express support or open-mindedness to proportional representation.
A National Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform is a great way to receive the input of informed citizens about how to make every vote count.
We know Canada can do better than “majority” governments with 39% of the vote.
In an era of deepening political polarization and long-term challenges like building a resilient economy, dealing with climate change, and fixing health care, a fair and collaborative electoral system has never been more important.
Thank you for working with us to advocate for proportional representation during the federal Liberal leadership race.
