Gordon Gibson is senior fellow in Canadian Studies at The Fraser Institute, and is a regular newspaper columnist. He is widely acknowledged as the architect of The Citizens Assembly in British Columbia. Gibson was elected to the Legislature of B.C. in 1974, and served as both MLA and Leader of the B.C. Liberal Party (1975-79). Since then, he has been active in both business and public affairs in western Canada, including 12 years on the Canada West Council. With Canada West, he coauthored Regional Representation (1981), authored What if the Wheels Fall Off?: The Case for a Constituent Assembly (1992), and served on the Task Force on National Unity (1991-93).

Mr. Gibson's Comments Before the Pepperdine Conference

Gordon Gibson, spoke of the "mystical" experience he enjoyed, witnessing the citizens of his province participate in a deliberative democracy process in 2004. Following provincial elections in 2001 the governing Liberal party fulfilled a campaign promise to analyze British Columbia's election rules. In their "First Past the Post" (FPTP) system, a single party could completely dominate the political process by winning a bare majority. Many of the region's citizens wanted to investigate other election methods, which would more equitably reflect their votes.

In 2002, Gibson, who has been a Senior Fellow at Canada's Fraser Institute since 1993, was asked by the provincial government of British Columbia to devise a process whereby its citizens could more fully participate in the development of a new electoral system. The method he chose was deliberative democracy and the process he chose was a citizens' assembly. Beginning in 2003, a list of almost 16,000 randomly selected citizens was whittled down to a final group of 160 - equally representing the province geographically, by gender, age, plus two representatives from the region's aboriginal community.

This group convened its first meeting in January 2004, and in an amazing display of civic service, met every other weekend throughout the year (taking a break in the summer) to learn, deliberate, and, finally, create a new electoral process, which was then placed before the voters of the province as a ballot initiative. The Citizens' Assembly developed a "Single Transferable Vote" (STV) plan, described by Gibson in his speech, as a "radically new" process. Placed before the voters of British Columbia in May of 2005, the Assembly's plan needed to win 60% approval in order to become law. It earned 58% of the vote. Coming so close, and receiving praise throughout the province, the STV plan will come back before British Columbia's voters in 2009.

Speaking to an audience of Californians who wonder whether deliberative democracy might work in this state, Gibson spoke in clear and very encouraging words about the process' power to gather together an "articulate public" which could deal with complex issues (in this case, electoral reform) in an intelligent manner.

Gibson advised his listeners that any deliberative democracy enterprise needed to possess certain characteristics. First, to create legitimacy in the process, the representative political institutions must play a role in either creating the group, or, at least approving its existence. For the British Columbia Citizens' Assembly this was not an issue since the effort was developed and funded by the province's legislature. Secondly, the group of citizens who are selected to participate must be seen as truly representative of the general citizenry - a "valid proxy for us," as Gibson put it. For British Columbia, as mentioned earlier, this entailed a random sample that equally represented the province on certain criteria. Thirdly, the deliberative body must be given real, though limited, power to affect policy. The British Columbians who participated in the year-long Assembly knew that what they decided would be put before the voters for a final decision. Gibson mentioned that deliberative citizens' groups can act as "advisory" bodies as well, but if given "plenary" power, this needs to be checked by either legislative or full voter approval.

Finally, and continuing the theme of empowerment, Gibson stressed that any deliberative citizens' group must be given enough time and enough money to do its work. In the case of the Citizens' Assembly this meant a major time commitment to the deliberative process. This was necessary to learn about complex election policy issues, then develop their own solution. This demanded budgetary support from the provincial government, which, while sufficient for the development process, was probably insufficient for the vital final stage: marketing. When the STV plan re-emerges in 2009, Gibson promises there will be a better public relations campaign surrounding its introduction to the voters.

As a former elected official, Gibson still believes that representative democracy is the best method of "doing most of the public's business." Still, for issues that are "ripe," "intractable," and important, deliberative democracy by citizens is a powerful tool for providing policy answers through a democratic process. On a humorous note, Gibson stated that, while he "wouldn't fly in a plane designed by a citizens' assembly," there were difficult political problems that could be solved as they have been for centuries - by groups of well-informed people discussing possible solutions and agreeing to trade-offs. Gibson concluded by saying that the British Columbia Citizens' Assembly "changed [the] lives" of those who participated. It definitely appears to have changed Gibson as well.

• The Full Text of Mr. Gibson's Presentation