CELPIP Listening Part 6 Practice Test: Making Voting Mandatory

NARRATOR: In the last federal election, roughly one in three eligible Canadians did not vote, and among those under thirty the figure was closer to one in two. Alarmed by these numbers, a growing chorus of commentators argues that Canada should follow Australia's lead and make voting compulsory, with a modest fine for anyone who fails to cast a ballot.

NARRATOR: Among the most persuasive proponents is Andrea Kowalski, a political scientist in Winnipeg. Since Australia introduced compulsory voting in the nineteen twenties, she points out, turnout there has rarely dipped below ninety percent. More importantly, she contends, when everyone votes, politicians can no longer afford to cater exclusively to the older, wealthier citizens who reliably show up, and must instead address the concerns of renters, students and shift workers. Higher turnout, she adds, would also lend governments a stronger mandate, making it harder to dismiss election results as unrepresentative. Kowalski is careful to stress that compulsory voting does not force anyone to support a candidate; voters may return a blank ballot if they wish. The obligation, as she describes it, is merely to show up, much like jury duty.

NARRATOR: Critics find this reasoning unconvincing. Marcus Bell, a newspaper columnist, insists that the freedom to vote necessarily includes the freedom to abstain, and that staying home can itself be a meaningful political statement. He also questions whether dragging reluctant citizens to the polls genuinely improves democracy. Compulsion, he warns, may also breed resentment toward the very institutions it is meant to strengthen. Someone who knows nothing about the candidates, Bell argues, may simply pick the first name on the list, and research from Australia suggests that candidates placed at the top of the ballot do enjoy a small but measurable advantage. Bell would rather see governments invest in civics education and make voting more convenient, through measures such as online ballots and additional advance polling days.

NARRATOR: Kowalski dismisses online voting as a security gamble and observes that convenience measures have been tried for decades with disappointing results. Still, even she admits that a fine of, say, fifty dollars would fall hardest on the very people she hopes to bring into the system. Whether Canadians would ever accept a compulsory ballot remains to be seen. For now, the debate itself may be doing more to engage reluctant voters than any election campaign has managed.