[Author’s Name]
[Institution’s Name]
Essay on Electoral Reform in Canada
The Canada that went to the polls on May 22, 1979, was not a nation in a state of equilibrium. It was widely assumed that major constitutional changes would be necessary to induce the people and government of Quebec to remain within Canada and that the constitution would have to be adapted to the new realities of provincial power. Canadians had just been told by a major government task force that time was running out and that unless quick action were taken the fragmentation of the country was probable, some said inevitable.
Thus from November 15, 1976, when the Parti Québécois was elected to govern Quebec, up to the federal election in May 1979, there was an unusual amount of introspection: conferences on "whither Canada?" proliferated, academic assessments of the country's condition and prospects multiplied, federal-provincial conferences on the constitution were held, and parliamentary committees conducted hearings on constitutional changes proposed by the Trudeau government. The public was extensively consulted in a series of open meetings between September 1977 and April 1978 held all across the country by the Task Force on Canadian Unity. The commissioners' efforts to stimulate grass-roots feedback and to let the people speak produced "some 900 briefs and close to 3,000 letters." (Task Force on Canadian Unity, 1979).
Meanwhile in Quebec the provincial government was approaching the referendum to be held in the spring of 1980, in which the people of Quebec would be asked to contribute to the decision on their collective future. The wording of the referendum question had not been determined by the time of the national election, but it was bound to reflect the blend of integrity, partisan self-interest, and strategic advice from pollsters characteristic of political decisions in a democracy.
In these circumstances, it might have been expected that the general election would be infused with high drama, as the parties confronted the electorate with clear, alternative constitutional futures.
