Posted at 12:00 p.m.
lame democracy
Totally agree with you. In fact, I believe that Mr. Legault and his team have done an excellent job of managing Quebec during the pandemic and that we had to give them a second chance, which Quebecers have clearly indicated. However, our so-called democracy is very lame and we have seen further proof of this during these elections. If our system were perfectly democratic, today we would have 52 members from the CAQ, 19 from the PQ and QS, 18 from the PLQ and 17 from the PCQ. I therefore hope that our Prime Minister and his team will seriously alter our electoral system so that a fairer democratic representation finally arrives in Quebec!
John Baudouin
In danger
I completely agree with you: the presence of several parties facilitated the re-election of François Legault and his party. It is high time to change this way of doing things. Our democracy is in danger. Why go vote if our vote is not taken into account?
Ginette Noel
Not so bad system
Eighty-six percent of citizens voted either for the CAQ, the PLQ, QS or the PQ and will be represented in the National Assembly. Not a bad system. The allocation of financial resources remains to be rethought.
André Bruneau, Mascouche.
Simple reform
Given the current distortion between the percentage of votes and the number of elected members, the voting method must indeed be changed. In my opinion, mode switching shouldn’t be so complicated. It would simply be a matter of proceeding to a second round for all the constituencies that did not elect a deputy with a majority of 50% +1. In this case, a second round would be carried out by writing on the ballot papers the names of the two candidates who obtained the best results in the first round. Admittedly, the logistics would be a little more complex and the costs would be higher than in the present system, but democracy would gain from it.
Luc Palardy, Blainville
Blame the opposition
Rather than attacking the electoral system, why not ask why no other party could do better than the CAQ? Could it be because they are disorganized and incompetent? In professional sport, the less good remain on the bench! It is not the voting system that determines who is good or not, it is the voter in each constituency. And that’s good !
Norman Briand
Too nested
It is obvious that our electoral system is flawed, although if we compare it to the American electoral college, there is reason to be consoled. That said, the opposition parties will have to do their introspection. All of them are aimed at overly targeted clienteles. French-speaking separatists for the PQ; a very leftist and exclusively urban electorate for QS; Anglophones and Immigrants for the Liberal Party; the dissatisfied listeners of the radios of Quebec for the conservatives. They would like to make sure to get the CAQ re-elected that they wouldn’t do it any other way. Einstein said that insanity was to hope that the same actions repeated will lead to different results… Our opposition parties would do well to meditate a little on this. Changing the voting system is a good idea, but being more unifying for the opposition would not hurt either, I think…
Vincent Cayouette
The advantage of clarity
You are right to point out the distortions of the vote, but I see no sign that the provincial governments and the federal government want to change things. The current system has the merit of being clear: the party which elects the greatest number of deputies is elected. This rule applies to all parties. The coalition governments found in Europe are often ungovernable and create economic uncertainty.
Raymond Lévesque, Trois-Rivieres
The world has changed
It is high time to change our electoral system, overtaken by events, by the reality of a world that has changed a lot since the arrival of the British in Quebec. Society is more diverse and more complex than it has ever been. It is high time to recognize this diversity and finally work together. Political diversity must be recognized, as well as what collaboration means for a better world. Our future depends on it.
Nicolas Blanchett
For a commission of experts
There is indeed something wrong. Let political experts analyze this and send us their recommendations. Why not a commission where experts and politicians meet.
Francine Ponet
A right to speak denied
I’ve been voting since I was 18 and I’ve always made it a point to vote, even though deep down I knew my little X didn’t change much. I figured that gave me the right to blubber for the next four years. However, that is exactly the problem. An election should not be held to give us the right to complain, but to give us the right to speak. What the people have not had for a very long time. In addition, the height of the insult is that François Legault is re-elected thanks to the same flaws in the system that he promised to fix four years ago. I am now 47 years old and I can tell you that this was my last election in this broken and outdated system. A system that benefits politicians (all parties) who use these loopholes to gain legitimacy and advance their own agenda, while turning a deaf ear to opponents. In what state is the health of democracy? As long as there is not a reform representative of the will of the population, the next time that I will present myself in the ballot box, it will be to cancel my vote.
Christian Bernard, Fermont