Ajay Parasram, associate professor and founding fellow, MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance, Dalhousie University.
Western media has been abuzz with speculation that voters want to punish incumbent governments. But as recent elections in France and the United Kingdom suggest, they seem to prefer doing so by rewarding alternatives that seek progressive policy options or — if that seems too radical — at least creatively offers something new at the ballot box.
If we look across the pond, there has been a strong drive to punish incumbents who led their countries through economic downturns, the first (and not likely the last) pandemic in recent memory, continental war in Europe and the existential and catastrophic climate emergency.
In Canada, we also must add the largely failed attempts to advance reconciliation and sovereignty with Indigenous nations and people, more extreme forest-fire seasons, the housing crisis and societal divisiveness stemming from the so-called Freedom Convoy movement.
It’s been a busy half a decade, and these are just the most mainstream of issues.
Exhausted, angry
Western voters in recent weeks have demonstrated they’re exhausted, angry and frustrated with incumbents — but they’ve also indicated that when offered a choice between far-right ideology and policies that address their struggles, they’ll opt for the latter.
The recent French parliamentary elections are an example — pundits and polls all predicted an unprecedented victory for the far-right Rassemblement National, despite its legacy of racism and promise to distance France from the European Union.
After the first ballot, it seemed the populist party would accomplish this feat — but then other parties got together to innovatively offer a clearer choice to voters on the second ballot by agreeing not to run candidates against each other in hundreds of ridings.
The question posed to the electorate essentially shifted from simply: “Are you angry?” to a more nuanced: “Who is best placed to address your anger? The far right? Or a progressive coalition that wants to focus on liveable incomes, a cap on food inflation, pay increases for public sector workers and a wealth tax on the richest?”
It wasn’t magic that led to the unprecedented victory for the leftist coalition, it was policy ideas paired with the creative decision to work together ahead of the vote. Voters — especially younger voters — tend to be less partisan and much more outraged by the failure of incumbents to act meaningfully on the direct and existential circumstances shaping their lives.
Offering something new
What happened in France isn’t necessarily because people are left-wing — the rise of the far right in the EU elections that preceded the French elections saw huge gains for that movement. The left alliance in France worked hard ahead of the polls to present policy that spoke to people’s needs regardless of their political views.
As France Insoumise politician Clémence Guetté recently explained:
“That we were able to rally around a governing program devoted to responding to the social and ecological emergency is what made this alliance possible…it is aimed at responding to the needs of the French people and there is massive support for the measures it includes.”
Trusting voters ahead of polls arguably explains this shift.
It was a different story across the English Channel, even if it also led to the most crushing rebuke of the British Conservative Party in centuries. A massive majority government was handed to the Labour Party because the ancient first-past-the-post electoral system does not provide much room for creativity.
The system delivered Labour 175 more seats than they would have received under a system of proportional representation.
Canadian politicians have much to learn from studying these elections. The negative message of anger and fear that often characterizes western right-wing populism is good at confirming voters are angry with incumbents, but as France shows us, that populist anger can be channelled into creative policy ideas that inspire votes.
The supply-and-confidence agreement between the Liberals and New Democratic Party is interesting, but it wasn’t built on trust with voters because it was cobbled together after an election. Coalition-building and co-operation ought to be offered to voters ahead of time, as they are in other countries.
‘Same old choices’
Polls can’t really capture this dynamic, because they only offer snapshots of what people think in a particular moment, and those moments in western democracies are usually filled with apathy and dissatisfaction with the same old choices.
The Conservative Party of Canada isn’t doing much more than talking about axing a small carbon tax that’s largely handed back to Canadians in refunds.
But the Conservatives and their leader, Pierre Poilievre, seem to thrive on the emotional aspect of economic stress — anger may be enough, but maybe not when it’s met by an alternative that actually addresses economic justice, reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples and the devastation of runaway climate change.
Such an option does not yet exist in Canada, but there’s plenty of time to build it. If parties choose to respect voters’ intelligence, Canadians might have something worth voting for in the next federal election.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.