Change voting system, not government

Electoral reform is not a top-of-mind issue in this election, but it should be. Going into the election, people were mainly concerned about health care and housing affordability (according to an Ipsos poll). But almost half of those concerned people will not vote because they are cynical about the political system.

Seven out of 10 Canadians agree with the statement: “I don’t think governments care very much about what people like me think.”

Voters feel disenfranchised because they are. A winner-take-all electoral system with more than two parties usually means that a lot of constituencies elect members with less than 50 per cent of the vote, leaving a majority of the voters unrepresented. To make matters more alienating, our Westminster-style parliament gives the winning party — although it has a minority of votes — essentially dictatorial powers until the next unfair election.

In contrast, some forms of proportional representation give 95 per cent of voters the pleasure of electing someone to represent them in the legislature. To make matters even happier, the proportional system spreads votes more fairly among several parties so that some governments must be coalitions of two similar-minded parties, thus lessening the “elected dictatorship” effect.

Traditionally, when voters are concerned about issues such as health care and housing affordability, the voters change governments in an effort to get what they want. But there comes a time when it is wiser to change the electoral system itself to something more responsive to people’s concerns. Jim Bell Lantzville