Hamilton deserves a better voting system
Ranked balloting offers an option that reflects the will of more voters
With the dust settled from the most recent municipal election in Hamilton, it is time to reconsider the manner in which our local politicians are elected. Our voting system should reflect the wishes of those who cast a ballot and ensure that those elected have a mandate to govern, ideally with the support of a majority of folks who voted. In many instances, Hamilton’s current voting system fails to do this.
Under Hamilton’s system, the winner of the council seat (or mayor) is the person with the most votes, regardless of what percentage of voters expressed a preference for that person. This leads to some curious results. In last month’s municipal elections, eight of the 15 councillors elected secured fewer than 50 per cent of the votes in their wards: Maureen Wilson in Ward 1 (41.5 per cent), Jason Farr in Ward 2 (46.8 per cent), Nrinder Nann in Ward 3 (33.9 per cent), Esther Pauls in Ward 7 (25 per cent), John-Paul Danko in Ward 8 (41.6 per cent), Brad Clark in Ward 9 (38.7 per cent), Maria Pearson in Ward 10 (36.3 per cent), and Arleen Vander-Beek in Ward 13 (34.4 per cent). In other words, a majority of voters — as many as 75 per cent in the case of Ward 7 — preferred someone other than the person elected. If we go further back, with a crowded field in a Ward 7 byelection in 2016, Donna Skelly “won” the election with a mere 19.6 per cent of votes. In other words, despite 80.4 per cent of voters wanting someone other than Skelly, the council seat was awarded to her. Similarly, in the 2014 general election, Aiden Johnson won Ward 1 with 34.7 per cent of the voters and Doug Conley won Ward 9 with 26.2 per cent of the vote.
This does not necessarily suggest that a majority of voters in each ward were opposed to the winners, but simply indicates that they would have preferred someone else. How can we more accurately translate voter preferences into actual results? One such solution is referred to as Ranked Ballot, and it’s gaining some traction elsewhere in Ontario.
London recently conducted its first election using a ranked ballot system, and voters in both Cambridge and Kingston voted to adopt a ranked ballot system in non-binding referendums last month. Both councils are expected to implement the change in time for the 2022 election. In the case of London, all councillors and the mayor secured the support of a majority of voters, and thus the results more accurately reflect the preferences of voters than what we saw recently in Hamilton.
The ranked ballot system is straightforward. Instead of marking an X on the ballot, voters express their preferences by ranking their top three candidates and accordingly marking 1, 2, and 3 on their ballot beside their top choices.
The calculation part is slightly more complicated, but leads to results that better reflect voters’ preferences. If no candidate receives 50 per cent plus one of the votes when the ballots are first counted, then the candidate who received the least amount of votes is eliminated. The votes earned by the remaining candidates are then carried forward to the next round of counting, and the eliminated candidate’s ballots are redistributed to the remaining candidates, this time using the next choice indicated on those ballots. This process continues until one candidate has secured a majority of votes.
In the case of London’s mayoral election, it took 13 rounds of counting, but ultimately Ed Holder secured 58.8 per cent of the vote. Under the previous system, and the one currently used by Hamilton, he would have been elected with a mere 34.2 per cent of the vote as he secured the most votes, but far less than a majority.
Following the passage of provincial legislation in 2016 that allowed municipalities to change their voting system, council voted down a motion by former councillor Matthew Green to adopt a ranked ballot system by a tally of nine votes to five. Problematically, councillors tend to have a vested interest in the status quo and changing the voting system is generally not to their advantage. It is, however, to the advantage of more accurate political representation. As we reflect on the outcomes of the 2018 election and move forward, we need to keep in mind that more accurate and democratic outcomes are possible. We should push to ensure a better process in time for the 2022 election.
Brad Walchuk works for a public sector union and formerly taught Canadian politics in the Department of Political Science at both McMaster University and Brock University.