Skip to main content

An extensive review of nomination races run by Canada’s main political parties found more than 70 per cent of the contests had just one candidate, a finding researchers warn is a key weakness in Canadian democracy that the next Parliament should address.

The Samara Centre for Democracy reviewed nearly 3,900 federal nomination races that took place between 2003 and 2015 and spoke with insiders connected to the major federal parties in order to fully understand the process.

The results, contained in a report to be released Wednesday, produce a clear picture of how nomination races are conducted and reveal that successful nomination candidates fail to reflect Canada’s demographic diversity.

Story continues below advertisement

Nomination races are the elections – and occasionally direct appointments – that political parties organize in order to select the candidate that will represent them in each riding during an election.

The report said there is no way to know why so many nomination races feature just one contestant, but it lists potential reasons such as the manipulation of contests by parties or the perceived dominance of the leading candidate. However, the report notes the results suggest nomination contests do not produce a substantially different result than if parties had simply appointed their preferred candidate.

The research found women made up just 28 per cent of nomination contestants and appointed candidates were no more diverse in terms of gender or ethnic diversity than those chosen through nomination races.

The NDP had the highest percentage of female nomination contestants during the period that was reviewed at 40 per cent. The Liberal Party and Green Party both came in at 29 per cent, followed by the Bloc Québécois at 27 per cent and the Conservative Party at 16 per cent.

The researchers single out one key issue that could be addressed to boost participation in nomination races: Nomination races are often scheduled with little to no advance warning and tend to be quite short, with just a few weeks between the start and the end.

Because there is no clear “season” for party nominations, individuals who are thinking of running for the nomination may have no idea when the contest will begin.

The report recommends that nominations should follow clear rules and take place on fixed dates, so that the timing is clear. It states that it would be entirely appropriate for Elections Canada to provide an oversight rule to ensure nomination races are fair, clean and impartial.

Story continues below advertisement

Report co-author Michael Morden, Samara’s research director, said former members of Parliament frequently cite the nomination process as a problem that needs to be addressed.

“I think it’s a soft spot,” he said in an interview. “I think politicos tend to know that. It’s quite common for insiders to roll their eyes at what goes on at the nominations level. And because it’s so integral to the whole process, that leads to how we choose representatives, we think it’s reasonable for the public to realize its stake in this issue.”

Samara is a non-partisan charity that has produced a series of reports on the role of members of Parliament.

Mr. Morden said Elections Canada oversight makes sense given that parties are partly funded with taxpayer dollars through tax credits on political donations. Yet, he expects that recommendation will be a tough sell.

“It’s something that parties are pretty resistant to. Nobody likes to be regulated,” he said.

The report says such a system could go further, by making tax credit support partly conditional on whether or not parties set standards to encourage open nominations – as opposed to appointing candidates. Targets could also be set for the percentage of female candidates or candidates from underrepresented communities.

Story continues below advertisement

“We’ve collected a lot of anecdotes about how bad the nomination process can be, so we wanted to start to provoke the conversation by looking for some data that would let us step back and take a look at the system,” Mr. Morden said. “We wanted to bring some transparency to how names appear on the ballot.”

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies