Recently The Mark hosted a discussion with three people, myself included, on the public's engagement with our politics - where it's at and how it can be better. You can listen to the full tape here (we each speak for about 10 minutes), and I've included the highlights below.
The first up was with Peter Loewen, a prof at U of T, whose articles are must-reads for anyone wanting to better understand politics and political behaviour. In this chat, he points out that while young people have always participated less actively in politics than older ones, today's young people participate even less than their parents did when they were the same age (for more, see the study he did on youth voting, which is the best I've ever read on the subject).
Peter suggests three reasons why this may be so. The first two are related to the changing nature of our electoral politics. Elections matter less now than they did in the past, as there is more consensus among parties about how the country should be run, and elections are less competitive. To put it another way, elections are a little less interesting and the stakes are smaller, so people are less inclined to bother.
The last reason has to do with the nature of the "kids these days." While the evidence is not perfect, it does suggest today's youth have less of a sense of civic duty, and feel less obligation to vote. What to do about it is less clear, as Loewen points out, and must include multiple actors, including parents, schools and governments. And while the internet can help, it's not a panacea. "A lot of civic engagement is getting out of your house," Loewen points out.
A good segue to speaker number two, Taylor Gunn, whose fabulous organization Student Vote runs parallel elections in schools across the country and gives kids a chance to learn about democracy through "practice, practice, practice." As many of us know, the best way to learn is by doing, and as Taylor points out, books-based civics education alone just won't cut it.
I'm up third, and after a rapid-fire (yes, I'll speak more slowly next time) overview of our MP Exit Interviews and the central findings of The Accidental Citizen?, I'm asked reflect on what it might suggest about the nature of political leadership and the ways in which we can improve the public's engagement with our politics. I've cribbed bits from my responses below.
On our political leadership: "I mentioned how many MPs said they came to politics by accident, and described themselves as outsiders. Is that true, or is it that politics has become something for which you can't admit ambition in this country? We don't know the answer to that, but of the 65 MPs we interviewed, almost all of them were asked to run and many claimed they hadn't planned for a life in politics... That caused us to reflect on the nature of our political culture... what does it say if those who served explain away ambition? Could you imagine in any other profession if you were embarrassed to admit that you wanted to be a teacher or a doctor or a journalist... we wouldn't imagine that happening yet we allow that to happen in politics."
On increasing civic participation: "If we want to improve people's engagement with politics, we have to make it something that's discussed in a more constructive way than it is today. Politics is adversarial, and it's about power and policy debates... things that are healthy in any mature society. But sometimes the discussion that is constructed around our politics can be unwelcoming to those who aren't already engaged.
Second, if you look at the functioning of our political parties, it is their job to encourage people to participate in politics, whether through [facilitating candidate nominations], organizing policy debates and encouraging people to vote. It can be hard to organize people across the mass geography that is Canada, but maybe there are ways that we could use the local constituency associations of political parties to encourage more ongoing engagement in politics and public policy. If we did, anybody could identify, based on where they live, a community of interest of which they can be a part. If this were made more open and more outreach oriented, that may be another way."
You can listen to the entire piece here .