Justin Trudeau the leader of the Liberal Party promised 2015 will be the last election fought on the current first past the post system. Prime Minister Trudeau says "you have to make choices at one point". And his choice is to have an all party parliamentary committee make recommendations in 18 months "and see where that takes us". The Liberal House Leader Dominic Leblanc has rejected the idea of a referendum on changes that might be proposed by the committee and accepted by the government. Trudeau seems to have agreed with his House Leader's view to change the system with a simple vote in parliament by questioning the need for "referendums on everything that matters to the future of the country".

Despite it not being embedded in the constitution of the country, the electoral system isn't just anything. It is the thing that elects the governments of the country to uphold the constitution and guide the destiny of the nation. Next to the constitution, it is the most important institutional process that has given Canada a stable government since confederation. It is my view any major change to the first past the post electoral system - unlike electoral term change and the proposed change to the appointment of senators - is a major quasi constitutional change. It mustn't be made by a simple majority vote of those in parliament representing only 39.5% of the electorate.

Experts have written volumes on proportional representation (PR), the ranked ballot (RB) and the Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMPR) systems. Based on the 39.5% vote in the October election, PR would have reduced by 50 the Liberal seats in the house and it is widely agreed RB would have increased their majority by a significant number of seats. Trudeau had earlier expressed a preference for the RB system.

There are three basic questions that need to be answered: [1] Should we change our first past the post electoral system? [2] If so what should that new system be? [3]How do we approve the change?

I would suggest that Canada answer in the negative to the first question. While I respect and have some sympathy for those who want change and the reasons for that change I support the first past the post system. To paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill: first past the post is the worst electoral system except for all the other systems that have been tried from time to time.

The second question is going to be answered by the interparty parliamentary committee in about 18 months. Those wishing to be heard will be able to do so by making submissions to the committee in person or in writing as the committee travel the country.

The third question, I contend, is more difficult to resolve. Many people support change so that the representatives elected only by 39.5% "do not rule over a majority" as is the case post 2015 election. That is a fundamental principle argued by those who want change. But some of the very same people who argue for different systems are quite comfortable if they get the system of their choice voted in by a simple majority in Parliament representing only 39.5% of the electorate. That would be the case if the Liberal majority pushes something through parliament against the wishes of the Conservatives, the NDP and the sole green MP in the House of Commons.

Any change to the electoral system can't be a partisan endeavour. It has to be a nation building project. If the Trudeau government wants to remain true to its commitment to democratic electoral reform it has only two options. Either it must seek and find interparty agreement on the proposed changes and approve them with a unanimous or near unanimous vote in the House of Commons. Or it must place the proposed changes before the people in a nationwide referendum.

 Near unanimity in Parliament or a national referendum, Mr Trudeau! You have no other option, Sir!