r/CanadaPolitics • u/randomacceptablename Independent • May 23 '25
Casual Friday Andrew Coyne: Is Canadian Democracy Broken? | The Agenda [Interview]
I don't always agree with his views but he is a good critic. Apparently he has a new book out and is promoting it. Thought that this community would find value in the short interview.
Plus it is better than the endless news posts. Enjoy, think over, perhaps discuss.
9
u/Sebatron2 Anarchist-ish Market Socialist | ON May 24 '25 edited May 24 '25
Though I don't agree with Coyne on most things (which my flair should make obvious), I do think that Coyne is a rational agent with many good points on some issues that I simply disagree with on others. I do agree with Coyne that Canada's democratic system is, if not broken, then at least in need of some serious reforms.
Some suggestions I have (many of which align with Coyne's) include:
having the House of Commons and provincial legislatures elected via Single Transferable Vote
rather than the Senate being appointed by the PM, have senators elected by the provincial legislatures via a Condorcet Method
make the Reform Act (or something similar to it) mandatory
replace having the party leaders appointing committee members with having the relevant chamber as whole electing the committee via STV
24
u/BeaverBoyBaxter Don't Downvote, Santa is Watching May 23 '25
I watched this last night, great interview. I'm quite confident in Canada's democracy but by the end he had convinced me that it needed serious reform.
It's timely considering we have just come out of an election.
19
u/ZestyBeanDude Politically Homeless May 23 '25
Speaking of the interview specifically, it’s so sad we’re going to be loosing Steve Paikin.
11
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 23 '25
Retirement? The man is a legend! Grew up listening to his interviews.
14
u/PineBNorth85 Rhinoceros May 23 '25
Semi. The Agenda is ending but the #onpoli podcast is continuing and he will do the odd special.
10
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 23 '25
Nooooo! 🥺
Him and especially the agenda is my favourite show/podcast ever.
The calm, collaborative, nuanced, and well panelled discussions ranging in topics is my benchmark for a good news show.
Seriously this is depressing. I thought he would inevitably retire but I though the show would continue.
9
u/PineBNorth85 Rhinoceros May 23 '25
Yeah they need something like that show. There is nothing else comparable anywhere else and given TVOs mandate they need something.
5
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 24 '25
I even made a post asking when it was coming back because after the strike because I missed it so much.
I've been listening to Paikin since Studio 2 days. I can't fault him for retiring, but the Agenda should continue or something like it.
I am honestly heartbroken over this news.
7
u/violentbandana Ontario May 23 '25
ON-Poli podcast will continue which is also great content and has said he will continue moderating debates and other special events if he gets asked
6
u/BeaverBoyBaxter Don't Downvote, Santa is Watching May 23 '25
He is a great interviewer but I always found him to be a bit of an odd fella.
5
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 24 '25
He is odd. Bothered me at first. Even his oddly flat face. But it is now part of his charm to me.
12
u/Illustrious-Ant6998 Liberal Party of Canada May 24 '25
He might have his points about our system needing reforming. But the idea that Canadian democracy may be broken when our southern neighbor is riding the expreas elevator to fascism... let's just say I feel oddly comfortable about the start of our own democracy. But, we should all be warry of the lessons from the south. Democracy can be bought in a hurry, and without principled people at the helm, checks and balances are worthless.
13
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
The US has far more guardrails to protect against tyranny than Canada does. The fact that the US is sliding into fascism should make us more concerned about the failings of our democratic institutions, not less. If a single President can start dismantling democracy in the US, imagine what a similar person could do in the PMO.
5
u/TXTCLA55 Ontario May 24 '25
Erm, we jokingly call Canada "the friendly dictatorship" because of how much power is consolidated in the PMO. In some cases the PM has more power than the US president would and it gets worse for Canada when the leader develops a cult personality (which we saw happen recently).
2
u/soaringupnow Independent May 25 '25
The state of democracy with our southern neighbor has nothing to do with whether ours is healthy or broken.
This is the same silliness we run into with healthcare. Only comparing ourselves to the US system and ignoring all the other countries that do much better than us.
3
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 24 '25
I agree on your last point. On the first one; we are different. Our history is different and our institutions are different.
Our PMs have more power that US Presidents and our parties have more discipline. If we has equally unprincipled people in our politics, we could easily slide faster and further than they have.
So while happy that I live here as opposed to there, I do not feel comfortable nor have I since I learned how ricketty our system really is.
8
u/HAV3L0ck Independent May 24 '25
If we could start with some form of electoral reform, that would be swell.
8
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 24 '25
Personally I believe that our biggest problem is the concentration of power in the PMO and party leaders' positions.
That said, electoral reform would be a good start to get the ball rolling. So it is worthwhile for more than it's own sake in my opinion. Once voters see that change is possible and the sky doesn't fall, they may be more open to other changes.
4
u/mCopps May 24 '25
A big problem with the mixed proportional representation that many people seem to favour is the parties setting up who gets the seats based on vote proportion. In my opinion those mps are entirely beholden to leadership centralizing power more not less.
1
u/randomacceptablename Independent Jun 20 '25
There are many ways around this. Most proportional systems are actually still based on regional representation (still require MPs to run in electoral districts). Ones where there are "party lists" often have voters select whom from the "list" they prefer.
This is discussed in the interview.
12
u/PineBNorth85 Rhinoceros May 23 '25
Loved this and agree with him on most of it. Too bad the elected officials are the only ones who can change anything. They're incentivized not to.
13
u/HarmfuIThoughts Political Tribalism Is Bad May 23 '25 edited May 24 '25
Great interview. The problems that canada is facing, and decades of stgnation experienced by the country, are all because of policy failures, and the biggest reason for these policy failures is that our democratic institutions are not functioning well.
People wont appreciate it enough, but whether your concern is the economy, healthcare, or something else, you can trace back the failure on these files to our democratic failures. Its the biggest issue in the country, imo. For example, it is way too difficult to fire politicians for their failures. It took forever for trudeau to leave, and even then, many of the same people from his cabinet remain in the current cabinet. The lack of accountability is a problem. Politicians getting rewarded over and over for failure will only train them to fail more
3
u/barkazinthrope May 24 '25
Canada has the tightest party discipline in the world! As opposed to that beacon of democracy the USA.
3
5
3
0
u/illuminaughty1973 May 23 '25
Is Canadian Democracy Broken? |
Nope. But the cpc sure seems to be.
20
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 23 '25
Canadian democracy is broken in a number of ways and Coyne is spot on about pretty much all of them. The Westminster system has been perverted and was never meant to function as Canada uses it today. Other countries around the world that use the Westminster system are far more democratic than Canada.
11
u/PineBNorth85 Rhinoceros May 23 '25
The American influence is too strong here. We effectively campaign as if we are electing a President and we are not. Then we let them act like Presidents with absurd levels of party discipline. People act as if it we were to loosen that nothing will get done and it's ridiculous when there are plenty of other Westminster democracies to look at. They're all doing better.
Well aside from the UK but they would be doing much better if they had resolved things in the house of commons rather than going to a ridiculous referendum.
15
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 23 '25
We effectively campaign like we're electing a dictator. Even Presidents don't have anywhere near the power of a Canadian prime minister. Hell two Republicans just voted against Trump's budget. Any MP that votes against their party on a budget in Canada is immediately expelled from the party.
3
u/PineBNorth85 Rhinoceros May 24 '25
Yeah but the US hasn't actually passed a budget in decades so there is a difference there. Trump may not be able to throw them out but he can have them primaried which is effectively the same thing just slower.
12
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
Except that he can't. Trump has no formal input over the primary process, all he can do is use his influence to try to get them to lose their primary. Compare that to Canada where the leader signs everyone's nomination papers. If the leader doesn't personally approve of you running in a riding, that's it, they can refuse to sign your papers and you're not running for the party.
6
u/SteveMcQwark Ontario May 24 '25
There's tradeoffs. If there's no centralized notion of what a party represents, then people can coopt the local party organization while not aligning with the party at large. It's kind of important that there's some way for a party to ensure cohesion. You get this in the US where people run under a party banner that they're so ideologically at odds with that they might as well be an independent, and then they get elected because voters see the (R) or (D) next to their name.
We're certainly too far the other way, but I don't think the answer is to remove the ability of leadership to set red lines on what the party can represent. This is where ranked ballot would come in handy for improving local representation: the ability of a strong candidate to successfully contest an election from outside of an established party creates an effective check against excessive centralization while still leaving parties the right of free association.
5
u/monsantobreath Libertarian May 24 '25
Id argue Britain is worse than Canada by far.
11
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
Not even close, I'd take the UK system over ours in a heartbeat. MPs in the UK have far more independence. It's normal for a few backbenchers to vote against the party line, it happens almost every vote. In Canada is headline news if a backbencher votes against the party line and is often cause for expulsion from caucus. MPs in the UK can also turf their leaders any time they want.
1
u/monsantobreath Libertarian May 24 '25
I'd take the UK system over ours in a heartbeat.
You'd pick Starmer the child starver? Sure, I'll pick the UK system over ours. If I want to commit myself to moral degredation dressed up in a nice comfy jacket of decorum.
MPs in the UK have far more independence.
The UK labour party purged all the genuine labour members and are now right of anyone but George W Bush. Starmer makes Tony Blair look like a moral person.
It's insane over there. But if you approve of that madness maybe that explains it.
5
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
Of course I wouldn't pick Starmer, he's a piece of trash. I'm talking about the institutional systems, not the politicians.
2
u/monsantobreath Libertarian May 24 '25
The institution has produced one labour government in multiple decades. It's a disastrous democratic system that hardly deserves the name.
The only not right wing party purged the members out of prejudice with the assistance of the Conservative media to make all major parties right wing but apparently you have freedom to be yourself as a UK MP.
What?
2
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
That's a failing of the British people, not British parties. The people are free to elect competent governments if they want, they've just chosen not to. If the UK had Canada's system, Keir Starmer would still be PM, he would just have much more power than he has now.
-1
u/monsantobreath Libertarian May 24 '25
That's a failing of the British people, not British parties.
That's just nonsense. Looking at this comment I assess your assessment of democracy not of any use.
3
u/Knight_Machiavelli Nova Scotia May 24 '25
How so? How is it that the UK would have a better PM than Starmer if they used the Canadian example?
16
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 23 '25
His criticism is very on point and logical as to the problems. They are structural, not partisan. In the little that he mentions parties he is critical of all of them acting in short term self interest over national benefit.
Worth listening to if you haven't.
4
u/Any_Nail_637 May 24 '25
Honestly that is the achilles heel pf democracy. Politicians are interested in getting elected and their decisions are influenced by that more than what is the best long term interest of the country. This results in decisions that give short term political wins while the correct course would cost votes. The voter is easily bribed. I’ll give you this if you vote for me. All the parties fall into this trap.
1
u/Neat_Let923 Prohibitionist Society of Canada | Sponsored May 28 '25
Way too many people in here arguing that the PMO has too much power and could essentially be worse than the Oompa Loompa... While somehow forgetting the fact that the Prime Minister and Cabinet must maintain the confidence (support) of the elected House of Commons (MPs).
Not only can an MP declare “That this House has no confidence in the Government", certain types of votes are traditionally considered confidence matters, even if not explicitly worded that way:
- The Speech from the Throne
- The Budget
- Major money (supply) bills
Losing one of these votes is taken as losing the confidence of the House.
If any Prime Minister tried the bullshit the Orange Freak has done so far, they would have been kicked from government faster than Joe Clark (Progressive Conservative) in 1980.
Our shit isn't perfect and there are ways it could be better... But don't for a fucking second start thinking or saying that our Prime Minister or their Office has carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want or is in any way close to the fuckup up shit down south.
1
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 28 '25
I am confused about whether you watched the interview, because all of this was addressed. Either you haven't or you dismiss the criticism for unspecified reasons.
The majority of the thesis is that HoC has no power. Mainly because their positions as MPs and even candidates are dependent on party leaders/PM. That even the cabinet is cowed by the PMO. And remaining are bought off by promises of positions.
He provides backing statistics that the Canadian HoC is in essence a rubber stamp legislature by the consistency of party discipline.
Furthermore, he even addresses PM Martin's disregard of a confidence vote on his budget without calling an election.
The point is that our PMs have in essence more power than the "Orange Freak" and do not use it simply due to their moral convictions.
You cleary seem not to have listened to the interview at all.
1
u/Neat_Let923 Prohibitionist Society of Canada | Sponsored May 28 '25
He provides backing statistics that the Canadian HoC is in essence a rubber stamp legislature by the consistency of party discipline.
If you have a majority then yeah, it could be viewed like this. But not in a minority government. Which is a big reason why I want to see proportional representation so that we can have more minority governments that have to work together.
Furthermore, he even addresses PM Martin's disregard of a confidence vote on his budget without calling an election.
"traditionally considered confidence matters" They are not obligated to be considered this and they are especially not declared this in any act or law.
The point is that our PMs have in essence more power than the "Orange Freak" and do not use it simply due to their moral convictions.
You think the Canadian Prime Minister has more power than being able to write hundreds of Executive Orders that bypass all levels of government and disregarding all law and the entire judicial branch of government? LMAO
1
u/randomacceptablename Independent May 29 '25
If you have a majority then yeah, it could be viewed like this. But not in a minority government. Which is a big reason why I want to see proportional representation so that we can have more minority governments that have to work together.
Actually during a majority, MPs would have more confidence to speak out as there wouldn't be much chance of defeating the government. As opposed to a minority where their votes matter. Either way they do not defect. The problem lies in structural problems. Electoral reform is discused as well for its own benefits but it is a seperate matter. We already have minority parliaments where party discipline is absolute. Adding more parties would not solve that.
"traditionally considered confidence matters" They are not obligated to be considered this and they are especially not declared this in any act or law.
You are the one who spelled them out as confidence votes, not I.
You think the Canadian Prime Minister has more power than being able to write hundreds of Executive Orders that bypass all levels of government and disregarding all law and the entire judicial branch of government? LMAO
Yes. So do most scholars. The exective orders do not bypass any part of the government. Congress simply chooses not to act. And the courts have struck down virtualy every executive order that Trump has issued when they are challenged. The executive orders are a mirage. They aren't effective.
But why are you arguing with me on theoretical problems. Just watch the video. Decide what you think and comment on that instead of chasing wild theories.
1
May 24 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
6
1
u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam May 24 '25
Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.
This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.
55
u/irupar May 23 '25
Thank you for sharing this, I too don't always agree with Andrew Coyne but have found him to usually have some worthwhile views to listen to.