Reflections on Canada, five years in

OTTAWA—On Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day five years ago, my partner and I touched down at Pearson Airport from Australia after a series of flights so long, and passing through so many time zones, that we had started to question the very nature of reality. We’d left an old world behind—an enormous, former settler colony that was finally casting a critical eye over its foundation myths, with skyrocketing housing costs, rapidly inflating food prices, and increasingly severe natural disasters—and arrived in Canada for a new life. A Tim Hortons-wielding CBSA officer pressed a stamp over a picture of a platypus in my passport, and we were welcomed to our new home. Years of COVID-19, notwithstanding, we’ve had the chance to visit eight provinces, from Cape Spear in Newfoundland, to Vancouver’s Lions Gate Bridge. We’ve skated the world’s largest ice rink, witnessed mighty Atlantic swells from the Cabot Trail, and hiked among the wildflowers in British Columbia’s Coast Mountains. But upon arriving in Ottawa that first humid summer—which would have made even the most resilient Brisbanite blush—it was the Chambers of the federal Parliament that we made a beeline for. By Canada Day, we’d toured the temporary homes of both the House of Commons and the Senate. Five years later, having the opportunity to cover the good, the bad, and the ugly that goes on in this city is a true privilege, and this anniversary has led me to reflect on our time in this country. With that reflection has come what every citizen loves to read: a series of unsolicited, lukewarm takes from a foreigner about their country. Given this is a newspaper about government, I’ll be sticking to observations about the political realm, rather than the tried and true takes that every Australian import to Ontario has to offer—on the coffee, the cold, the coffee, bagged milk, the coffee, the speeding, and the coffee. Question Period is better (no, really) Look, I can’t believe I wrote that either. I also used my words very carefully—Question Period isn’t good, but it is better than what passes for the hour of government accountability in Canberra. There is something to be said for the sheer hammering the government takes every afternoon that the House of Commons sits. I speak not of the quality of the questions-cum-social-media-content asked, but the fact that the opposition gets to ask as many questions of the government as it does. There are mercifully few softballs lobbed from the same side of the Chamber during the 45-minute, daily drubbing. Compare this to Australia, where the governing and opposition benches take turns questioning cabinet members in a negative-positive-negative sandwich from hell. First past the post The only thing worse than my pontificating about coffee are my thoughts about Canada’s voting system. Coming from a country that did away with first-past-the-post during the First World War, it’s fascinating to see it in action in Canada, which also tends to have more three- or four-cornered contests than Australia. That someone can win a riding with the consent of less than half of their constituents was an alien concept when we arrived. Australia’s system of instant runoff, ranked choice voting—essentially Diet FPTP™—for the House of Representatives isn’t much better at reflecting the actual voting percentages of the parties, but it does ensure that the most-preferred candidate (or at bare minimum, the least disliked) prevails in each riding, especially in cases when no candidate attracts more than 35 per cent or lower of the vote. That’s not to say that instant runoff doesn’t exist in Canada, as the major parties have used the system to elect their leaders. Whether that, or any other systems, will be extended to general elections will be interesting to follow. The Senate That one of the two federal Chambers remains unelected in Canada was a shock upon arriving in this country. While the provinces have done away with their houses of “sober second thought,” the feds rely on the Red Chamber as a bulwark against majority government power. While still a house of review, Australia’s Senate was modelled less on the United Kingdom’s House of Lords and more on the United States Senate. There are 76 seats—12 for each of the states, plus two each for the territories—with half the state and all territory senators up for election every three years. Those senators are elected proportionally via a different system than their House counterparts, meaning that whoever gets a majority in the Lower House is not guaranteed one in the Upper House. The two major blocs in Australia—Labor and the Liberal/National coalition—hold 88 per cent of seats in the House of Representatives, but only 75 per cent in the Senate, allowing for more diverse voices–for better or worse. Notwithstanding former Australian prime minister Paul Keating’s description of our country’s Senate as “unrepresentative swill,” the red chamber of my homeland is a lot easier to follow. All politics should be local Yes, it’s unusual coming from a writer for a federal politics-focused publication, but the number of provincial and local government policies that fly under the radar as decisions made in Ottawa are scrutinized is fascinating. That’s not a criticism of those who do excellent work covering the halls of power in Queen’s Park, Quebec City, and the other capitals. But as someone who started in reporting in a country town, it was always the decisions of a local council or state government that had more impact on the day-to-day lives of residents. There’s less of a back-and-forth between Australia’s federal, state and territory governments—excluding the pandemic—than there is between Canada’s federal, provincial, and territory governments. There’s the old adage that “all politics is local,” but the scrutiny and attention always seems to default back—understandably—to the national government. It’s especially important in a country of contrasting geography, political opinions, and needs. Don’t choose (or axe) your party leaders based on opinion polls This is a warning, or rather a plea, from a country that has had seven changes of prime minister so far this century, only three of which have happened as a result of a general election. Changing PMs on the back of a bad opinion poll came into fashion at about the same time as planking in Australia, and continued through to the heyday of the fidget spinner. But the fad of nervous backbenchers knifing their leader was far more damaging to public morale than those other two, and it appears—for now, at least—to have settled down. Each time, the switch to a new prime minister granted the incumbents a sweet hit in the opinion polls. But voters soon became jaded, as they realized there was little more than a new face on the same policy and governance issues. The two major parties have been rewarded for their insular views with some of their lowest primary votes on record, as voters seek out new groups who will look at their needs, rather than lines on a chart. You’re open to new ideas Even if they are rarely implemented, what I’ve seen of Canadian politics indicates a willingness to explore other ideas, tried and tested elsewhere. There’s a curiosity about what is happening in other parts of the world, and that is thankfully expanding beyond what is happening with the big neighbour to the south. So this Canada Day, I’ll be reflecting on what the past five years have taught me about the world, about myself, and the 40 million-odd people with whom I’m lucky to share this land. Stephen Jeffery is a deputy editor at The Hill Times. The Hill Times

Reflections on Canada, five years in

Reflecting on the fifth anniversary of landing in Canada from Australia, I've decided to set out something every citizen loves to read—a series of unsolicited, lukewarm takes from a foreigner about their country.

Peru and Canada: a strong and expanding bilateral relationship

Misinformation: the other epidemic

Construction price shocks a familiar tale, says letter writer

U.S. election results offer a lesson for all parties

The world changed on Nov. 5

A closer look at the proposed foreign influence transparency registry

Spirit of Anzac looms large, 109 years on

Politics This Morning: Canadians think Poilievre’s a problem solver

Australian doc provides what-not-to-do lesson for Canadian MPs, and a how-to guide for public broadcasting

Private member’s bill to make MPs’ oath to King Charles III optional could prove ‘more trouble than it’s worth’ for government

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

Reflections on Canada, five years in

Reflecting on the fifth anniversary of landing in Canada from Australia, I've decided to set out something every citizen loves to read—a series of unsolicited, lukewarm takes from a foreigner about their country.

Get Hill Life & People Newsletter