How to make election results better reflect voters’ choices
A form of mixed-proportional representation is an alternative Canada should explore, Henry Milner says.
What can we expect of Maryam Monsef, as she takes up her functions as minister responsible for Democratic Institutions? There are important decisions to be taken in this area, and Monsef has entered an uncertain terrain where the needs of democracy can conflict with the interests of parties.
Monsef was not a member of the previous Liberal caucus, so we do not know whether she would have supported the motion introduced by the NDP on Dec. 3, 2014 stating that “a form of mixed-member proportional representation would be the best electoral system for Canada.” The caucus was split, and among those opposed was leader Justin Trudeau, though the first part of the motion, “the next federal election should be the last conducted under the current first-past-the-post electoral system.” was included in his party’s election program
The program goes on to say: “We will convene an all-party parliamentary committee to review a wide variety of reforms, such as ranked ballots, proportional representation (PR), mandatory voting, and online voting. This committee will deliver its recommendations to Parliament. Within 18 months of forming government, we will introduce legislation to enact electoral reform.” Upon being elected, the new prime minister restated that he would do just that for the 2019 elections.
Trudeau is said to personally prefer ranked ballots over PR. In the ranked-ballot system, candidates need over 50 per cent of the votes to be elected, and second choices are counted if first choices are insufficient, and so on. This improves the outcome for middle-of-the-road parties like the Liberals, but does little to make representation any more fair. In countries comparable to Canada, only the Australian lower house uses this system.
There are several forms of PR, which is used in the large majority of modern democracies, but if looking for a system made to measure for Canada, the new minister should look to the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system advocated by the Law Commission and most experts who favour reform, as well as the NDP. It is used in Germany, New Zealand and Scotland.
Under MMP, voters have two votes: one for their local MP just as today, and the other to choose among the parties’ regional lists. Votes unrepresented in the local results are compensated via the number of party candidates elected from the regional lists, so that the proportion of MPs matches the vote share.
A typical region would have 10 to 15 seats with two-thirds elected locally and one-third from the lists. To see how this could work, let us take Saskatchewan and its 14 single member districts. In the 2015 election, the Liberal vote was 23.9 per cent, winning one seat; the NDP vote 25.1 per cent, winning three seats; while the remaining 11 went to the Conservatives, who received 48.5 per cent of the vote. Under MMP, Saskatchewan would be a regional district, with the local districts redrawn to elect nine local MPs, and the other five to consisting of regional MPs that represent the province as a whole. If we base our simulation on the actual results, then we can suppose that the Conservative candidate came first in six, the NDP in two, and the Liberals in one of the nine local ridings. Based on the province-wide percentages, Liberal voters would elect three of Saskatchewan MPs, NDP voters four, and Conservative voters seven. To bring their totals up to these numbers, two Liberal regional MPs, two NDP regional MPs, and one Conservative regional MP would be elected from the lists.
We now have much detailed knowledge and experience of how such a system works in practice. We can but hope that it will be on the table when an alternative to the current electoral system is discussed, and not a caricature of PR that can be dismissed in favour of ranked ballots, a nonreform.