Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says he favours making membership in the federal Liberal party free. He believes this could introduce his party to a broader public increasingly disenchanted with politics.
The idea is certainly timely. Although there was a stronger-than-usual turnout in the 2015 federal election, overall, voter participation has trended steadily downward for several decades. During the 1950s and ’60s, the average turnout for federal elections was 75 per cent. In 2008, only 59 per cent of us went to the polls.
Trudeau’s notion is that anyone who takes out a free membership would be allowed to vote on such matters as the party platform and choice of leaders.
It’s an interesting thought, and certainly worth considering. It seems doubtful the current membership fee — $10 — is a major obstacle to participation. Nevertheless, by opening wide the doors, the Liberals might generate excitement. That, in itself, would be of benefit.
There are, however, significant challenges. Britain’s Labour party recently adopted a similar policy.
Before the run-up to its 2015 leadership election, party membership was offered to anyone willing to pay a nominal amount — five pounds (about $8). The result was a flood of new members, the majority of whom, it turned out, held strongly activist views.
The new leader selected in this manner — Jeremy Corbyn — was himself a rebel whose stance on various issues placed him on the radical fringe of the party. His term in office has been tumultuous.
For more than a year, the party has struggled through a series of bitter rows, brought about by lack of agreement between the leader and his colleagues. Eventually, the infighting led to the near-collapse of Corbyn’s shadow cabinet.
That, in turn, caused a majority of the party’s MPs to demand his resignation. When Corbyn refused, a leadership election was announced.
What comes next is anyone’s guess. Corbyn has announced he means to run again, and might very well win via the same process that installed him in the first place.
This chaotic experience points to an underlying necessity of party politics. Parties exist to formulate policy, seek the public’s support and, they hope, prosecute these policies in office. To survive and prosper, they need devoted adherents who share a common vision and will work toward it.
But a party that opens its doors to all comers isn’t seeking adherents or committed supporters. It is inviting a free-for-all.
What happens, for instance, if Quebec separatists sign up in droves and elect a new leader committed to breaking up the country? Unlikely? Perhaps, but the current membership of the Liberal party is about 300,000. More than twice that number voted for the Bloc Québécois in the last federal election.
And less dramatic possibilities exist. Trudeau has given his support to a pair of free-trade deals negotiated by the preceding Conservative administration — the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement and the Canada-EU treaty.
But both are strongly opposed by many on the centre-left. It’s entirely imaginable that a recruiting drive could be organized to pack policy meetings and reverse direction.
Of course, it might be argued that this is simply democracy in action. Why shouldn’t opponents of free trade have a voice?
Yet enabling hostile takeovers by single-issue groups threatens the consensus-building that political parties rely on. Governing is only possible, in the long term, if those in office pursue policies that are broadly acceptable to the electorate.
The prime minister is gambling that even though his door is opened wide, nothing will come through it that he cannot manage.
This could be a brave new step, or a convulsion in the making.
