In the last provincial election, the majority of Alberta voters stayed home. And in the 2008 federal election, while BC had a 60% turnout. Alberta had only 54%. Why? Because, outside of two or three ridings in Edmonton, the Conservatives had safe seats. Why bother voting?
Many Alberta provincial Liberals have favoured PR for some time. The party's website used to say "An Alberta Liberal government would organize a Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform, to determine if other voting systems — including proportional representation — could improve participation and representation in our democracy."
So what would the Alberta Legislature look like under a PR model?
Note that, if voters knew every vote would count, more would have voted, and some would have voted differently. Alberta would have had different candidates - likely more women, and more diversity of all kinds. However, all I can do is project the votes cast in 2008 into a reformed voting system.
I used a Mixed Member Proportional model with regional open lists. You still have 83 MLAs. The 50 local MLAs are elected from districts larger than today's (about five of today's districts become three larger districts.) The 33 regional top-up MLAs are elected from five regions.
You, the voter, have two votes: one for your local MLA, the other for the party you want in government and for your favourite regional MLA candidate of your party (like the right-hand part of this ballot.) So you are free to vote for the best candidate locally; only your regional ballot counts for your party. The regional MLAs top up the local results, so the total result matches the vote shares in the region. Every vote counts equally. And the regional seats are filled by the party's regional candidates who get the most votes on the regional ballot (unless that person was already elected to a local seat.)
See MMP Made Easy.
Overall, PC voters would still have elected a majority: 44 of the 83 MLAs. Liberal voters would have elected 22 MLAs, NDP voters seven, Wildrose Alliance voters six, and Green Party voters four.
Liberal voters would have elected MLAs across Alberta, not just in Calgary, Edmonton and Lethbridge. In the 12 ridings of Northern Alberta, Liberal voters would have elected two regional MLAs: maybe Lisa Higgerty from Hinton and Ross Jacobs from Fort McMurray. In the 13 ridings of Central Alberta, another two MLAs such as Diane Kubanek and Richard Farrand of Red Deer. In the 13 ridings of Southern Alberta, two more regional MLAs such as Karen Charlton of Medicine Hat and Bal Boora of Lethbridge. In the 23 Calgary ridings, three more MLAs such as Craig Cheffins, Mike Robinson and Avalon Roberts. In the 22 Edmonton ridings, four more MLAs such as Rick Miller, Mo Elsalhy, Bruce Miller and Weslyn Mather.
New Democrat voters would have elected a regional MLA from Northern Alberta such as Adele Boucher Rymhs from Peace River. In Central Alberta, a regional MLA such as Lisa Erickson from Leduc County. In Calgary, a regional MLA such as Julie Hrdlicka. In Edmonton, two more MLAs such as David Eggen and Ray Martin.
Wildrose Alliance voters would have elected two regional MLAs from Southern Alberta, no doubt leader Paul Hinman, plus another such as Kevin Kinahan from Coaldale. From Calgary, two regional MLAs such as Chris Jukes and Bob Babcock. From Central Alberta, a regional MLA such as Dean Schmale from Winfield. From Northern Alberta, a regional MLA such as Dale Lueken from Fairview.
Green Party voters would have elected a regional MLA from Calgary such as leader George Read or Susan Stratton, one from Edmonton such as Glen Argan or Kate Harrington, one from Central Alberta such as Joe Anglin from Rimbey, and one from Southern Alberta such as Dan Cunin from Cochrane.
All MLAs would have faced the voters, and all votes would have counted. Democracy, eh?
Voters for all parties would be represented in all regions, except where they had too few voters to elect even one regional MLA: NDP voters in southern Alberta, Wildrose Alliance voters in Edmonton, and Green voters in Northern Alberta.
Of course, that was with a miserable turnout of only 40.6 percent. Fair voting systems usually boost turnout by an average of about six percent. Likely more in Alberta, where turnout in 1993 was more than 60 percent. Funny thing: if there's no point voting, lots of people don't. Or as Elections Alberta stated "In an election where there appears to be a clear front runner, electors may be less motivated to vote since the outcome is perceived to be predetermined and their vote may not be needed or may not make a difference." So add a whole lot more votes to the picture, and who knows what would have happened?
This projection is based on five regions: Calgary with 23 MLAs (14 local, 9 regional); Edmonton with 22 MLAs (13 local, 9 regional); Central Alberta with 13 MLAs (8 local, 5 regional); Southern Alberta with 13 MLAs (8 local, 5 regional); and Northern Alberta with 12 MLAs (7 local, 5 regional).
The same kind of model works well federally too. Alberta's provincial Liberal party is quite separate from their federal cousins, and more popular, so federal Liberals need proportional representation even more than provincial Liberals.
This model is based on the recommendation of the Law Commission of Canada. An STV model like BC-STV would likely have had much the same result.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Saturday, December 6, 2008
What would a proportional House of Commons look like?
What would the House of Commons look like, under the democratic proportional model described in the previous post? (That was the open-regional-list mixed member proportional model recommended by the Law Commission of Canada in 2004 and by Scotland's Arbuthnott Commission in 2006, and like the model described in more detail by Prof. Henry Milner at an electoral reform conference Feb. 21, 2009. A similar model is used in the German province of Bavaria.)
See MMP Made Easy. See also the simulation of the 2011 results.
Power to the voters: Competing MPs
An exciting prospect: voters have new power to elect who they like. New voices from new forces in parliament. No party rolls the dice and wins an artificial majority. Cooperation will have a higher value than vitriolic rhetoric. Instead of having only a local MP -- whom you quite likely didn’t vote for -- you can also go to one of your regional MPs, all of whom had to face the voters. A typical region would have 14 MPs, 9 local, 5 regional. Governments will have to listen to MPs, and MPs will have to really listen to the people. MPs can begin to act as the public servants they are.
Why middle-sized regions? As Lord Jenkins’ Commission in the United Kingdom wrote, additional MPs locally anchored to small areas are “more easily assimilable into the political culture and indeed the Parliamentary system than would be a flock of unattached birds clouding the sky and wheeling under central party directions.”
What would the House look like?
This simulation is only if people voted as they did on October 14, 2008. In fact, if voters knew every vote would count, more would have voted -- typically 6% or so more -- and some would have voted differently. We would have had different candidates - more women, and more diversity of all kinds. We could have different parties.
Still, this will show us the shape of a proportional House of Commons.
As noted below, the result Canada-wide would have been 117 Conservatives, 84 Liberals, 56 NDP, 31 Bloc, 18 Greens, and two Independents. The majority of Canadians voted Liberal, NDP or Green, and a Liberal-NDP-Green coalition government would have a clear majority. Or a Liberal-NDP government could rely on either the Greens or the Bloc for a majority.
The Liberal caucus would not be just the GTA plus the Montreal area and the Atlantic Provinces. Currently only 15 of the 77 Liberal MPs are outside those regions. Liberal voters would have elected 26 more MPs from regions where they are now unrepresented or under-represented: nine more from the West, ten more from Ontario outside the GTA, and seven more from Quebec outside Montreal. With the open-list system, those regional MPs would be the regional candidates who get the most votes on the regional ballot.
In the 2008 elections, 71 of the west's 92 MPs were Conservatives, 21 others. With a democratic voting system that would be 50 Conservatives, 42 others (double today's 21).
In 2008, 49 of Quebec’s MPs were Bloc members, and only 26 were federalists (14 Liberals, 10 Conservatives, 1 NDP, 1 independent). It took 86,203 federalist voters to elect one Quebec MP last year, but only 28,163 Bloc voters. With a fair voting system that would be 18 more federalists: 31 Bloc MPs and 44 federalists (17 Liberals, 16 Conservatives, 9 NDP, 1 Green, 1 independent.)
Today, 28% of the voters in South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) voted Liberal but elected none of those 15 MPs.
Liberal voters would have elected 26 more MPs, starting with nine more from the West:
In the BC Lower Mainland five MPs, not four. Maybe Wendy Yuan or Don Bell or Brenda Locke or Raymond Chan or Dana Miller? Maybe even Michelle Hassen?
In the BC Interior and Vancouver Island two MPs, not just one. Maybe Diana Cabott from Kelowna, or Briony Penn?
In Edmonton and Northern Alberta two MPs, not none. Maybe Donna Lynn Smith and Jim Wachowich or Rick Szostak?
In Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta two MPs, not none. Maybe Jennifer Pollock and Sanam Kang or Heesung Kim or Anoush Newman from Calgary or Michael Cormican from Lethbridge?
In Saskatchewan two MPs, not just one. Maybe Deb Ehmann or David Orchard, or even young star Karen Parhar?
In Manitoba three MPs, not just one. Maybe Raymond Simard and Wendy Menzies or John Loewen or Bob Friesen or Tina Keeper?
In South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) four MPs, not none. Maybe Karen Redman, Lloyd St. Amand, John Maloney and Paddy Torsney or Andrew Telegdi or Larry Di Ianni or Walt Lastewka or Joyce Morocco or Eric Hoskins?
In Southwestern Ontario (London - Windsor - Owen Sound) four MPs, not just one. Maybe Susan Whelan, Sue Barnes and Greg McClinchey or Sandra Gardiner or Matt Daudlin or Tim Fugard?
In Eastern Ontario (Ottawa to Belleville) four MPs, not just three. Maybe Marc Godbout or Penny Collenette or Dan Boudria from Ottawa, or David Remington from Napanee, or Carole Devine from Pembroke?
In Central East Ontario (Durham-Peterborough-Barrie) three MPs, not just two. Maybe Betsy McGregor from Peterborough, Paul Macklin from Northumberland—Quinte West, Steve Clarke from Simcoe North or Andrea Matrosovs from Collingwood?
In Northern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Maybe Ken Boshcoff or Roger Valley or Louise Portelance or Diane Marleau or Paul Bichler?
In Quebec City and Eastern Quebec three MPs, not none. Maybe Jean Beaupré and Pauline Côté or Yves Picard from the Quebec City region, and Nancy Charest from Matane?
In Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie one MP, not none. Maybe Nathalie Goguen from Sherbrooke or Jean-Luc Matteau from Maskinongé?
In Montérégie two MPs, not just one. Maybe Denis Paradis from Brome--Missisquoi or Roxane Stanners from Saint-Lambert, or Pierre Diamond, or their young star Brigitte Legault?
In Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière two MPs, not just one. Maybe Robert Frégeau or Eva Nassif or Suzie St-Onge or Pierre Gfeller or Alia Haddad?
In Outaouais--Abitibi--Nord-du-Quebec two MPs, not just one. Maybe Gilbert Barrette from Abitibi, Michel Simard or Cindy Duncan McMillan?
On the other hand, Liberal voters would have elected 20 fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: 11 from the GTA, four from Montreal, two from Nova Scotia, two from Newfoundland and Labrador, and one from PEI. So they would have a net gain of only six MPs, but their caucus would be far more representative. And it would not face an inflated Bloc caucus and an inflated Conservative caucus. Why don't more Liberals speak up about our undemocratic voting system?
Conservative voters would have elected 16 more MPs from regions where they were unrepresented or under-represented, starting with eight from Quebec:
On Montreal Island three MPs, not none. Maybe Hubert Pichet, Andrea Paine and Rafael Tzoubari?
In Montérégie two MPs, not none. Maybe Michael Fortier and Maurice Brossard or Marie-Josée Mercier?
From Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière two MPs, not none. Maybe Claude Carignan from Saint-Eustache and Jean-Pierre Bélisle from Laval or Sylvie Lavallée from Joliette?
From Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie two MPs, not just one. Maybe Éric Lefebvre, André Bachand, Marie-Claude Godue or Claude Durand?
From Toronto five MPs, not none. Maybe Joe Oliver, Rochelle Wilner, John Carmichael, Axel Kuhn and Patrick Boyer or Dr. Benson Lau or Roxanne James or Heather Jewell, or even their young star Christina Perreault?
From Northern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Maybe Gerry Labelle from Sudbury, Cameron Ross from Sault Ste. Marie, or Dianne Musgrove from Manitoulin?
From Newfoundland and Labrador one MP, not none. Maybe Fabian Manning?
From PEI two MPs, not just one. Maybe Mary Crane?
However, Conservative voters would have elected 40 fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: five from Saskatchewan, four from Edmonton and Northern Alberta, four from Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta, three from the BC Lower Mainland, three from the BC Interior and Vancouver Island, two from Manitoba, four from Central East Ontario (Durham-Barrie-Peterborough), four from Southwest Ontario, four from South Central Ontario, three from Eastern Ontario, two from Quebec City and Eastern Quebec, and two from New Brunswick. So they would have a net loss of 24 MPs, yet their caucus would be more representative of the whole country.
New Democrat voters would have elected 23 more MPs from regions where those voters are unrepresented or under-represented.
In Saskatchewan three MPs, not none. Maybe Nettie Wiebe, Don Mitchell and Valerie Mushinski or Janice Bernier?
In Edmonton and Northern Alberta two MPs, not just one. Maybe Ray Martin or Mark Voyageur?
In Calgary and South-Central Alberta one MP, not none. Maybe John Chan, Mark Sandilands or Holly Heffernan?
On Montreal Island two MPs, not just one. Maybe Alexandre Boulerice or Anne Lagacé Dowson or Daniel Breton?
In Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière one MP, not none. Maybe Réjean Bellemare?
In Outaouais--Abitibi--Nord-du-Quebec one MP, not none. Françoise Boivin?
In Montérégie two MPs, not none. Maybe Richard Marois and Sonia Jurado or Lise Saint-Denis?
In Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie one MP, not none. Maybe Annick Corriveau from Drummond, or their young star Geneviève Boivin from Trois-Rivières, or TV host Yves Mondoux from Sherbrooke?
In Quebec City and East Quebec two MPs, not none. Maybe Anne-Marie Day from Quebec City and Guy Caron from Rimouski or Raymond Côté from Quebec City?
In Central East Ontario two MPs, not none. Maybe Mike Shields from Oshawa and Myrna Clark from Barrie or Jo-Anne Boulding from Muskoka?
From Toronto four MPs, not just two. Maybe Peggy Nash and Marilyn Churley?
From Peel-Halton-York-Guelph two MPs, not none. Maybe Tom King from Guelph and Jagtar Shergill from Brampton or Nadine Hawkins from Markham or Karan Pandher from Mississauga?
In Eastern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Rick Downes from Kingston, or Darlene Jalbert from the Cornwall area?
From Nova Scotia three MPs, not just two. Gordon Earle or Tamara Lorincz?
In New Brunswick two MPs, not just one. Rob Moir or Alice Finnamore?
In Newfoundland and Labrador two MPs, not just one. Ryan Cleary?
However, New Democrat voters would have elected four fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: two from Northern Ontario, one from Central South Ontario and one from Manitoba. So they would have a net gain of 19 MPs.
Green voters would have elected 17 MPs from regions where those voters are unrepresented:
One from Nova Scotia: no doubt Elizabeth May.
Two from the BC Lower Mainland: maybe Adriane Carr and Blair Wilson or Jim Stephenson?
Two from the BC Interior and Vancouver Island: maybe Huguette Allen or Angela Reid from the Okanagan, and John Fryer or Adam Saab or Christina Knighton from Vancouver Island?
One from Edmonton and Northern Alberta: maybe Les Parsons from Wetaskiwin or Monika Schaefer from Yellowhead or Will Munsey from Vegreville-Wainwright or David James Parker from Edmonton?
One from Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta: maybe Lisa Fox or Natalie Odd?
One from Saskatchewan: maybe young star Amber Jones, or Tobi-Dawne Smith?
One from Manitoba: maybe Kate Storey from Dauphin or Dave Barnes from Brandon?
One from Montreal: maybe Claude Genest or Jessica Gal?
One from Toronto: maybe Georgina Wilcock, Stephen LaFrenie, Ellen Michelson or Sharon Howarth?
One from Peel-Halton-York-Guelph: maybe Mike Nagy from Guelph, Ard Van Leeuwen from Caledon, Blake Poland from Oakville or Glenn Hubbers from Aurora?
One from Eastern Ontario: maybe Jen Hunter or Lori Gadzala or Sylvie Lemieux from Ottawa, or Eric Walton from Kingston?
One from Central East Ontario: maybe Valerie Powell or Erich Jacoby-Hawkins or Peter Ellis from Simcoe County, or Glen Hodgson from Parry Sound?
One from Central South Ontario: maybe Cathy MacLellan from Kitchener or Peter Ormond from Hamilton?
One from Southwestern Ontario: maybe Dick Hibma from Owen Sound or Mary Ann Hodge or Monica Jarabek from London?
One from New Brunswick: maybe Mary Lou Babineau from Fredericton or Alison Ménard from Moncton?
The unrepresented
It's not just Green Party voters who are unrepresented.
In Southern Alberta 32% of voters voted for candidates other than Conservatives, but elected no one.
As mentioned above, 28% of the voters in South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) voted Liberal but elected no one.
In the City of Toronto 26% of voters voted Conservative and elected no one.
In Saskatchewan 25.5% of voters voted NDP but elected no one.
In Estrie-Centre-du-Québec-Mauricie 18% of voters voted Liberal, and in Eastern Quebec 16%, but both groups elected no one.
See MMP Made Easy. See also the simulation of the 2011 results.
Power to the voters: Competing MPs
An exciting prospect: voters have new power to elect who they like. New voices from new forces in parliament. No party rolls the dice and wins an artificial majority. Cooperation will have a higher value than vitriolic rhetoric. Instead of having only a local MP -- whom you quite likely didn’t vote for -- you can also go to one of your regional MPs, all of whom had to face the voters. A typical region would have 14 MPs, 9 local, 5 regional. Governments will have to listen to MPs, and MPs will have to really listen to the people. MPs can begin to act as the public servants they are.
Why middle-sized regions? As Lord Jenkins’ Commission in the United Kingdom wrote, additional MPs locally anchored to small areas are “more easily assimilable into the political culture and indeed the Parliamentary system than would be a flock of unattached birds clouding the sky and wheeling under central party directions.”
What would the House look like?
This simulation is only if people voted as they did on October 14, 2008. In fact, if voters knew every vote would count, more would have voted -- typically 6% or so more -- and some would have voted differently. We would have had different candidates - more women, and more diversity of all kinds. We could have different parties.
Still, this will show us the shape of a proportional House of Commons.
As noted below, the result Canada-wide would have been 117 Conservatives, 84 Liberals, 56 NDP, 31 Bloc, 18 Greens, and two Independents. The majority of Canadians voted Liberal, NDP or Green, and a Liberal-NDP-Green coalition government would have a clear majority. Or a Liberal-NDP government could rely on either the Greens or the Bloc for a majority.
The Liberal caucus would not be just the GTA plus the Montreal area and the Atlantic Provinces. Currently only 15 of the 77 Liberal MPs are outside those regions. Liberal voters would have elected 26 more MPs from regions where they are now unrepresented or under-represented: nine more from the West, ten more from Ontario outside the GTA, and seven more from Quebec outside Montreal. With the open-list system, those regional MPs would be the regional candidates who get the most votes on the regional ballot.
In the 2008 elections, 71 of the west's 92 MPs were Conservatives, 21 others. With a democratic voting system that would be 50 Conservatives, 42 others (double today's 21).
In 2008, 49 of Quebec’s MPs were Bloc members, and only 26 were federalists (14 Liberals, 10 Conservatives, 1 NDP, 1 independent). It took 86,203 federalist voters to elect one Quebec MP last year, but only 28,163 Bloc voters. With a fair voting system that would be 18 more federalists: 31 Bloc MPs and 44 federalists (17 Liberals, 16 Conservatives, 9 NDP, 1 Green, 1 independent.)
Today, 28% of the voters in South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) voted Liberal but elected none of those 15 MPs.
Liberal voters would have elected 26 more MPs, starting with nine more from the West:
In the BC Lower Mainland five MPs, not four. Maybe Wendy Yuan or Don Bell or Brenda Locke or Raymond Chan or Dana Miller? Maybe even Michelle Hassen?
In the BC Interior and Vancouver Island two MPs, not just one. Maybe Diana Cabott from Kelowna, or Briony Penn?
In Edmonton and Northern Alberta two MPs, not none. Maybe Donna Lynn Smith and Jim Wachowich or Rick Szostak?
In Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta two MPs, not none. Maybe Jennifer Pollock and Sanam Kang or Heesung Kim or Anoush Newman from Calgary or Michael Cormican from Lethbridge?
In Saskatchewan two MPs, not just one. Maybe Deb Ehmann or David Orchard, or even young star Karen Parhar?
In Manitoba three MPs, not just one. Maybe Raymond Simard and Wendy Menzies or John Loewen or Bob Friesen or Tina Keeper?
In South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) four MPs, not none. Maybe Karen Redman, Lloyd St. Amand, John Maloney and Paddy Torsney or Andrew Telegdi or Larry Di Ianni or Walt Lastewka or Joyce Morocco or Eric Hoskins?
In Southwestern Ontario (London - Windsor - Owen Sound) four MPs, not just one. Maybe Susan Whelan, Sue Barnes and Greg McClinchey or Sandra Gardiner or Matt Daudlin or Tim Fugard?
In Eastern Ontario (Ottawa to Belleville) four MPs, not just three. Maybe Marc Godbout or Penny Collenette or Dan Boudria from Ottawa, or David Remington from Napanee, or Carole Devine from Pembroke?
In Central East Ontario (Durham-Peterborough-Barrie) three MPs, not just two. Maybe Betsy McGregor from Peterborough, Paul Macklin from Northumberland—Quinte West, Steve Clarke from Simcoe North or Andrea Matrosovs from Collingwood?
In Northern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Maybe Ken Boshcoff or Roger Valley or Louise Portelance or Diane Marleau or Paul Bichler?
In Quebec City and Eastern Quebec three MPs, not none. Maybe Jean Beaupré and Pauline Côté or Yves Picard from the Quebec City region, and Nancy Charest from Matane?
In Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie one MP, not none. Maybe Nathalie Goguen from Sherbrooke or Jean-Luc Matteau from Maskinongé?
In Montérégie two MPs, not just one. Maybe Denis Paradis from Brome--Missisquoi or Roxane Stanners from Saint-Lambert, or Pierre Diamond, or their young star Brigitte Legault?
In Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière two MPs, not just one. Maybe Robert Frégeau or Eva Nassif or Suzie St-Onge or Pierre Gfeller or Alia Haddad?
In Outaouais--Abitibi--Nord-du-Quebec two MPs, not just one. Maybe Gilbert Barrette from Abitibi, Michel Simard or Cindy Duncan McMillan?
On the other hand, Liberal voters would have elected 20 fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: 11 from the GTA, four from Montreal, two from Nova Scotia, two from Newfoundland and Labrador, and one from PEI. So they would have a net gain of only six MPs, but their caucus would be far more representative. And it would not face an inflated Bloc caucus and an inflated Conservative caucus. Why don't more Liberals speak up about our undemocratic voting system?
Conservative voters would have elected 16 more MPs from regions where they were unrepresented or under-represented, starting with eight from Quebec:
On Montreal Island three MPs, not none. Maybe Hubert Pichet, Andrea Paine and Rafael Tzoubari?
In Montérégie two MPs, not none. Maybe Michael Fortier and Maurice Brossard or Marie-Josée Mercier?
From Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière two MPs, not none. Maybe Claude Carignan from Saint-Eustache and Jean-Pierre Bélisle from Laval or Sylvie Lavallée from Joliette?
From Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie two MPs, not just one. Maybe Éric Lefebvre, André Bachand, Marie-Claude Godue or Claude Durand?
From Toronto five MPs, not none. Maybe Joe Oliver, Rochelle Wilner, John Carmichael, Axel Kuhn and Patrick Boyer or Dr. Benson Lau or Roxanne James or Heather Jewell, or even their young star Christina Perreault?
From Northern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Maybe Gerry Labelle from Sudbury, Cameron Ross from Sault Ste. Marie, or Dianne Musgrove from Manitoulin?
From Newfoundland and Labrador one MP, not none. Maybe Fabian Manning?
From PEI two MPs, not just one. Maybe Mary Crane?
However, Conservative voters would have elected 40 fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: five from Saskatchewan, four from Edmonton and Northern Alberta, four from Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta, three from the BC Lower Mainland, three from the BC Interior and Vancouver Island, two from Manitoba, four from Central East Ontario (Durham-Barrie-Peterborough), four from Southwest Ontario, four from South Central Ontario, three from Eastern Ontario, two from Quebec City and Eastern Quebec, and two from New Brunswick. So they would have a net loss of 24 MPs, yet their caucus would be more representative of the whole country.
New Democrat voters would have elected 23 more MPs from regions where those voters are unrepresented or under-represented.
In Saskatchewan three MPs, not none. Maybe Nettie Wiebe, Don Mitchell and Valerie Mushinski or Janice Bernier?
In Edmonton and Northern Alberta two MPs, not just one. Maybe Ray Martin or Mark Voyageur?
In Calgary and South-Central Alberta one MP, not none. Maybe John Chan, Mark Sandilands or Holly Heffernan?
On Montreal Island two MPs, not just one. Maybe Alexandre Boulerice or Anne Lagacé Dowson or Daniel Breton?
In Laval--Laurentides--Lanaudière one MP, not none. Maybe Réjean Bellemare?
In Outaouais--Abitibi--Nord-du-Quebec one MP, not none. Françoise Boivin?
In Montérégie two MPs, not none. Maybe Richard Marois and Sonia Jurado or Lise Saint-Denis?
In Estrie--Centre-du-Québec--Mauricie one MP, not none. Maybe Annick Corriveau from Drummond, or their young star Geneviève Boivin from Trois-Rivières, or TV host Yves Mondoux from Sherbrooke?
In Quebec City and East Quebec two MPs, not none. Maybe Anne-Marie Day from Quebec City and Guy Caron from Rimouski or Raymond Côté from Quebec City?
In Central East Ontario two MPs, not none. Maybe Mike Shields from Oshawa and Myrna Clark from Barrie or Jo-Anne Boulding from Muskoka?
From Toronto four MPs, not just two. Maybe Peggy Nash and Marilyn Churley?
From Peel-Halton-York-Guelph two MPs, not none. Maybe Tom King from Guelph and Jagtar Shergill from Brampton or Nadine Hawkins from Markham or Karan Pandher from Mississauga?
In Eastern Ontario two MPs, not just one. Rick Downes from Kingston, or Darlene Jalbert from the Cornwall area?
From Nova Scotia three MPs, not just two. Gordon Earle or Tamara Lorincz?
In New Brunswick two MPs, not just one. Rob Moir or Alice Finnamore?
In Newfoundland and Labrador two MPs, not just one. Ryan Cleary?
However, New Democrat voters would have elected four fewer MPs from regions where they are now over-represented: two from Northern Ontario, one from Central South Ontario and one from Manitoba. So they would have a net gain of 19 MPs.
Green voters would have elected 17 MPs from regions where those voters are unrepresented:
One from Nova Scotia: no doubt Elizabeth May.
Two from the BC Lower Mainland: maybe Adriane Carr and Blair Wilson or Jim Stephenson?
Two from the BC Interior and Vancouver Island: maybe Huguette Allen or Angela Reid from the Okanagan, and John Fryer or Adam Saab or Christina Knighton from Vancouver Island?
One from Edmonton and Northern Alberta: maybe Les Parsons from Wetaskiwin or Monika Schaefer from Yellowhead or Will Munsey from Vegreville-Wainwright or David James Parker from Edmonton?
One from Calgary, Southern and Central Alberta: maybe Lisa Fox or Natalie Odd?
One from Saskatchewan: maybe young star Amber Jones, or Tobi-Dawne Smith?
One from Manitoba: maybe Kate Storey from Dauphin or Dave Barnes from Brandon?
One from Montreal: maybe Claude Genest or Jessica Gal?
One from Toronto: maybe Georgina Wilcock, Stephen LaFrenie, Ellen Michelson or Sharon Howarth?
One from Peel-Halton-York-Guelph: maybe Mike Nagy from Guelph, Ard Van Leeuwen from Caledon, Blake Poland from Oakville or Glenn Hubbers from Aurora?
One from Eastern Ontario: maybe Jen Hunter or Lori Gadzala or Sylvie Lemieux from Ottawa, or Eric Walton from Kingston?
One from Central East Ontario: maybe Valerie Powell or Erich Jacoby-Hawkins or Peter Ellis from Simcoe County, or Glen Hodgson from Parry Sound?
One from Central South Ontario: maybe Cathy MacLellan from Kitchener or Peter Ormond from Hamilton?
One from Southwestern Ontario: maybe Dick Hibma from Owen Sound or Mary Ann Hodge or Monica Jarabek from London?
One from New Brunswick: maybe Mary Lou Babineau from Fredericton or Alison Ménard from Moncton?
The unrepresented
It's not just Green Party voters who are unrepresented.
In Southern Alberta 32% of voters voted for candidates other than Conservatives, but elected no one.
As mentioned above, 28% of the voters in South Central Ontario (Hamilton-Waterloo-Niagara) voted Liberal but elected no one.
In the City of Toronto 26% of voters voted Conservative and elected no one.
In Saskatchewan 25.5% of voters voted NDP but elected no one.
In Estrie-Centre-du-Québec-Mauricie 18% of voters voted Liberal, and in Eastern Quebec 16%, but both groups elected no one.
Monday, December 1, 2008
A readily available proportional representation model for Canada.
In the last election more than half the votes cast elected no one. This is not fair. Our voting system gives regional grievance parties a bonus, but no bonus for compromising. Many members of all parties and none want a fairer voting system.
Do we have a readily available model for a proportional representation system? Yes. (I have modified the model described below similar to the model presented by Prof. Henry Milner Feb. 21, 2009.)
The starting place would be the Law Commission of Canada Report tabled in March 2004. It proposed a mixed member proportional (MMP) model with two-third of MPs elected locally as today, and one-third of MPs to be regional "top-up" MPs elected personally under the "open list" model. You would have two votes, and more choice. "Open list" means that voters can vote for whoever they like out of the regional candidates nominated by the party's regional nomination process. Like the right-hand part of this ballot. The party would win enough regional "top-up" seats to compensate for the disproportional local results we know all too well. Those regional seats would be filled by the party's regional candidates who got the highest vote on the regional ballot. Each province would keep the same number of MPs it has today.
What have we learned since then?
The Law Commission was right to propose an open-list model. All MPs would face the voters. The voters have twice rejected MMP models with closed province-wide lists. Ontario voters would have voted for even that model if they had understood it, polls have shown, but that is not easy to explain, and anyway electoral reformers have concluded the Law Commission’s model would have been more acceptable on that point: the regional MPs would be more accountable. Voters are concerned with effective local representation, having an MP that they voted for and not having to vote strategically. With open regional lists, every voter will have a local MP, and if they did not vote for him or her, at least they will mostly have a regional MP they voted for.
This open-regional-list model was recommended by Scotland's Arbuthnott Commission in 2006 as an improvement to their regional model. A similar model is used in the German province of Bavaria.
In Germany and Scotland they nominate local candidates first, then rank them on regional lists as well. With open-list in smaller accountable regions the rank doesn't matter as much.
The Report says it is inspired by the systems currently used in Scotland and Wales, which have 16-MP regions (9 local MPs, 7 regional MPs) or 12-MP regions (8 local MPs, 4 regional MPs). With 2/3 local MPs, a 14-MP region would have 9 local MPs and 5 regional MPs. This would mean seven regions in Ontario, five or six in Quebec, two in BC, and two in Alberta. They also show a sample calculation with larger regions, because they provide more proportional results than smaller districts, and make it easier for smaller parties to win representation in Parliament, but this is not their recommendation.
First, Northern Ontario showed last year that they wanted Northern voters to elect Northern MPPs, and a guarantee that the North would not lose MPPs. The North must be a separate region. Jack Murray’s Ontario NDP PR Task Force reached the same conclusion in 2002.
Second, regions of 36 or so MPs would mean an effective threshold of only 3%. In Ontario’s referendum last year, the 3% threshold was widely criticized. Smaller regions with an effective threshold of 5% (or even higher in some cases) would be less controversial.
Third, ballots with long lists of candidates for as many as 12 regional MPs would be easy targets for criticism. Smaller regions would have more accountable MPs. As Lord Jenkins said: regional "members locally anchored . . . are, we believe, more easily assimilable into the British political culture and indeed the Parliamentary system than would be a flock of unattached birds clouding the sky and wheeling under central party directions."
So we need medium-sized regions.
The preferred model for Quebec has also been refined since 2004. Last December the Quebec Director-General of Elections tabled the latest report, which suggests a model with 127 MNAs in nine regions, an average of 14 each. Typically a region would have five regional MNAs, a workable number, and nine local MNAs, with an effective threshold averaging 7.1%. In the two most urban and largest regions it would be lower, giving new parties a chance for a foothold. When parties nominate five or more regional candidates, they will naturally tend to nominate a balanced group including women and minorities. And 85% of voters support electing more women, while only 11% oppose this.
In the model described here, in most cases, three present ridings become two larger ridings. Easily organized with an expedited Boundaries Commission process. Local ridings are usually 50% bigger than today. Regions have at least one-third regional MPs; a typical region would have 14 MPs, 9 local, 5 regional.
Yet would such a model, with separate smaller regions and only 35% regional MPs (compared with more than 40% in other models), produce fair results?
Yes, fair enough. A spreadsheet of the 2008 results shows that this model would (if voters voted the same) give quite proportional results. (See below.)
Does the model have distracting math problems? Not at all. If a party gets 38% of the vote in a 15-seat region, that's 5.7 seats, round up to 6. If it won 5 local seats already, that's one regional "top-up" MP. The only possible tricky math would be this: suppose one party gets 7.4 seats, one gets 6.3, and one gets 1.3, if you round them all down, that's only 14 seats; who gets the 15th? The one with 7.4: the "largest remainder" rule.
One of Jack Layton’s objectives in the 2008 election campaign was, as he put it, "the very early implementation" of proportional representation. This model would fit the bill.
What would a proportional House of Commons look like?
As compared with a perfectly proportional model, this model gave the Bloc three extra seats as a result of the low 35% ratio, at the cost of the Greens (two) and the Liberals (one). In the rest of Canada the 35% ratio costs the NDP two seats and the Greens two more, to the benefit of the Liberals (three, outweighing their Quebec loss) and the Conservatives (one). The result Canada-wide would have been 119 Conservatives, 83 Liberals, 56 NDP, 31 Bloc, 17 Greens, and two Independents: a Liberal-NDP government could rely on either the Greens or the Bloc for a majority. (In Germany they don't use the term "minority government" in that situation, they call it "governing with shifting majorities," a rather more accurate term. But in the situation where the minority government has only one partner, that's a "minority government with external support.")
This model gives the Greens one MP from Quebec, where they got only 3.5%. If there was a legal threshold of 5% in each province, the Greens would have no MP from Quebec.
Note that these numbers assume voters voted as they did on October 14. In fact, if voters knew every vote would count, more would have voted, and some would have voted differently. We would have had different candidates - more women, and more diversity of all kinds.
Do we have a readily available model for a proportional representation system? Yes. (I have modified the model described below similar to the model presented by Prof. Henry Milner Feb. 21, 2009.)
The starting place would be the Law Commission of Canada Report tabled in March 2004. It proposed a mixed member proportional (MMP) model with two-third of MPs elected locally as today, and one-third of MPs to be regional "top-up" MPs elected personally under the "open list" model. You would have two votes, and more choice. "Open list" means that voters can vote for whoever they like out of the regional candidates nominated by the party's regional nomination process. Like the right-hand part of this ballot. The party would win enough regional "top-up" seats to compensate for the disproportional local results we know all too well. Those regional seats would be filled by the party's regional candidates who got the highest vote on the regional ballot. Each province would keep the same number of MPs it has today.
What have we learned since then?
The Law Commission was right to propose an open-list model. All MPs would face the voters. The voters have twice rejected MMP models with closed province-wide lists. Ontario voters would have voted for even that model if they had understood it, polls have shown, but that is not easy to explain, and anyway electoral reformers have concluded the Law Commission’s model would have been more acceptable on that point: the regional MPs would be more accountable. Voters are concerned with effective local representation, having an MP that they voted for and not having to vote strategically. With open regional lists, every voter will have a local MP, and if they did not vote for him or her, at least they will mostly have a regional MP they voted for.
This open-regional-list model was recommended by Scotland's Arbuthnott Commission in 2006 as an improvement to their regional model. A similar model is used in the German province of Bavaria.
In Germany and Scotland they nominate local candidates first, then rank them on regional lists as well. With open-list in smaller accountable regions the rank doesn't matter as much.
The Report says it is inspired by the systems currently used in Scotland and Wales, which have 16-MP regions (9 local MPs, 7 regional MPs) or 12-MP regions (8 local MPs, 4 regional MPs). With 2/3 local MPs, a 14-MP region would have 9 local MPs and 5 regional MPs. This would mean seven regions in Ontario, five or six in Quebec, two in BC, and two in Alberta. They also show a sample calculation with larger regions, because they provide more proportional results than smaller districts, and make it easier for smaller parties to win representation in Parliament, but this is not their recommendation.
First, Northern Ontario showed last year that they wanted Northern voters to elect Northern MPPs, and a guarantee that the North would not lose MPPs. The North must be a separate region. Jack Murray’s Ontario NDP PR Task Force reached the same conclusion in 2002.
Second, regions of 36 or so MPs would mean an effective threshold of only 3%. In Ontario’s referendum last year, the 3% threshold was widely criticized. Smaller regions with an effective threshold of 5% (or even higher in some cases) would be less controversial.
Third, ballots with long lists of candidates for as many as 12 regional MPs would be easy targets for criticism. Smaller regions would have more accountable MPs. As Lord Jenkins said: regional "members locally anchored . . . are, we believe, more easily assimilable into the British political culture and indeed the Parliamentary system than would be a flock of unattached birds clouding the sky and wheeling under central party directions."
So we need medium-sized regions.
The preferred model for Quebec has also been refined since 2004. Last December the Quebec Director-General of Elections tabled the latest report, which suggests a model with 127 MNAs in nine regions, an average of 14 each. Typically a region would have five regional MNAs, a workable number, and nine local MNAs, with an effective threshold averaging 7.1%. In the two most urban and largest regions it would be lower, giving new parties a chance for a foothold. When parties nominate five or more regional candidates, they will naturally tend to nominate a balanced group including women and minorities. And 85% of voters support electing more women, while only 11% oppose this.
In the model described here, in most cases, three present ridings become two larger ridings. Easily organized with an expedited Boundaries Commission process. Local ridings are usually 50% bigger than today. Regions have at least one-third regional MPs; a typical region would have 14 MPs, 9 local, 5 regional.
Yet would such a model, with separate smaller regions and only 35% regional MPs (compared with more than 40% in other models), produce fair results?
Yes, fair enough. A spreadsheet of the 2008 results shows that this model would (if voters voted the same) give quite proportional results. (See below.)
Does the model have distracting math problems? Not at all. If a party gets 38% of the vote in a 15-seat region, that's 5.7 seats, round up to 6. If it won 5 local seats already, that's one regional "top-up" MP. The only possible tricky math would be this: suppose one party gets 7.4 seats, one gets 6.3, and one gets 1.3, if you round them all down, that's only 14 seats; who gets the 15th? The one with 7.4: the "largest remainder" rule.
One of Jack Layton’s objectives in the 2008 election campaign was, as he put it, "the very early implementation" of proportional representation. This model would fit the bill.
What would a proportional House of Commons look like?
As compared with a perfectly proportional model, this model gave the Bloc three extra seats as a result of the low 35% ratio, at the cost of the Greens (two) and the Liberals (one). In the rest of Canada the 35% ratio costs the NDP two seats and the Greens two more, to the benefit of the Liberals (three, outweighing their Quebec loss) and the Conservatives (one). The result Canada-wide would have been 119 Conservatives, 83 Liberals, 56 NDP, 31 Bloc, 17 Greens, and two Independents: a Liberal-NDP government could rely on either the Greens or the Bloc for a majority. (In Germany they don't use the term "minority government" in that situation, they call it "governing with shifting majorities," a rather more accurate term. But in the situation where the minority government has only one partner, that's a "minority government with external support.")
This model gives the Greens one MP from Quebec, where they got only 3.5%. If there was a legal threshold of 5% in each province, the Greens would have no MP from Quebec.
Note that these numbers assume voters voted as they did on October 14. In fact, if voters knew every vote would count, more would have voted, and some would have voted differently. We would have had different candidates - more women, and more diversity of all kinds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
