While everyone continues to talk Brexit over the weekend, and you have a curious number of Conservative MPs here in Canada almost irresponsibly tweeting gleefully over it, I am forced to wonder if they are not in fact trying to demonstrate enthusiasm for referenda in general, given their daily caterwauling for one on electoral reform in this country. That could be why their messages are so focused on the democratic result of it, as opposed to the substance of what the Brexit vote actually represented. But that’s just idle speculation, so take of it what you will.

Of course, talk of how referenda are terrible at determining issues of substance is also part of why that’s been on my mind, because I am leaning more to the side that the issue of electoral reform would require a referendum because of what it proposes to do, and I don’t trust that the government is going to get useful answers from a series of townhalls and a report from a committee whose composition has been gamed to look “fair” when the person doing the gaming has a specific goal and output in mind. Of course, an electoral reform referendum would be subject to its won particular brands of demagoguery, particularly considering that we have an appalling lack of civic literacy in Canada, and when nobody can accurately depict the current electoral system, we’re going to be subject to some propaganda on the change side of the referendum whose fictions will be as bald-faced as that which the Leave side promised in the Brexit campaign, not that it will matter to the casual voter because it plays into emotions about things that feel and sound “fair” without actually grasping the situation (which is a solution in search of a problem). The last referendum on electoral reform in Ontario largely failed because the government of the day was ambivalent, but the current federal government is not, and that worries me. So it’s something to consider.

Meanwhile, the meltdown happening in the UK’s Labour Party, with a problematic leader who refuses to resign in the face of a full-blown caucus revolt is another object lesson in why membership selection of party leaders is a terrible, terrible system because it gives those leaders an excuse to refuse to be held to account, citing a “democratic mandate” as Jeremy Corbyn is doing right now. And no, adopting the provisions in Michael Chong’s Reform Act where caucus can vote to remove a leader is not actually the solution because it entrenches that parties must elect leaders by way of their membership, and that disconnect between selection and removal creates enormous problems in terms of the legitimacy of the removal process. Accountability matters, and needs to be balanced with democracy. Membership selection of leaders does not provide the needed accountability, and the horrifying lesson of a leader who won’t be held to account is playing out right now and should give everyone pause about the system that we blazed the trail for in this country.

Good reads:

• In the event you’ve missed it, here is a sampling of some of the Canadian reactions to the Brexit result. The talk now is of a Canada-UK trade deal.
• In Advance of this week’s Three Amigos summit, we’re hearing hints about a renewed focus on free trade in the face of increased US protectionism.
• The government’s websites are all getting a refresh with the new Canada.ca portal.
• Patty Hajdu says that online harassment and cyber-violence could be part of the government’s strategy to combat gender-based violence.
• A Senate report points to Indigenous Affairs and Public Safety each passing the buck when it comes to First Nations border issues.
• Bill Morneau insists that the costs of CPP expansion will be minimal, particularly with EI premiums set to drop.
• There are complaints about CRA’s double standard of naming and shaming small-time tax cheats, but not disclosing big-money off-shore cheaters.
• Canadian cross-border truckers are concerned the new entry-exit provisions will have those who spend enough time south of the border be subjected to US taxes.
• TransCanada is seeking NAFTA arbitration for the rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline.
• Here’s the tale of one of our diplomats who went “rogue” to help Syrian rebels at the start of the conflict in that country.

Odds and ends:

The Star gets a look inside JTF2.