Canada’s
new Minister for Democratic Institutions, Maryam Monsef, was interviewed by
Peter Mansbridge. He says "People want the system changed. How are you
going to go about that?" She replies: "Yes, Canadians voted for real
change, for a government that puts their needs ahead of the party's. A
government that celebrates our diversity, and not takes a divisive approach. .
. . I hope that Canadians will be proud of their politicians and their country
because of the kind of work we do and the respectful manner that we go about
it."
Maryam
Monsef’s heart is in the right place, like many in caucus. “Sunny ways” will, I trust, include respect for Canada’s
political pluralism and diversity. Including the 60.5% of Canadians who did not
vote Liberal in 2015.
Respect for those who wanted a minority government
A poll taken
after the election showed just over 25% of those who voted Liberal would have preferred a minority Liberal
government.
That
should be no surprise. The E-day Liberal vote of 39.5% comprised the 25.7% they
had pre-writ, the 12.2% picked up from the NDP support decline, and 1.6% from
the Green decline. That means 35% of the Liberal E-day voters had decided
during the campaign, many near the very end, that this was how to stop Harper. Some
of them were originally Liberals who had decided, back before the first debate,
to cast a strategic vote for the NDP, and then came home to the Liberals. But most
were new strategic voters.
The day
before the election, pollsters were still expecting a minority government. So
were many Liberal candidates. So most new Liberal MPs know how they won.
“We will make every vote count”
The
Liberal platform on Electoral Reform began “We
will make every vote count.”
Many
Canadians who voted Liberal want assurance that never again will a divisive political leader win 100% of the power with 39% of the votes. And never again will voters have to vote against something, or vote
for a less-preferred candidate to block the election of one even less
preferred.
Only proportional representation will respect
the wishes of supporters of all parties to cast votes that are not only
counted, but count to elect their first choice.
Only proportional representation will make every vote count.
Respect for unrepresented Liberals
Sure,
proportional representation would let voters elect some opposition MPs in
regions that are Liberal strongholds today.
But in
return it will let unrepresented Liberal voters elect about 18 more MPs (at least 13), as
shown below. And see Canada's 70 missing MPs.
The ranked ballot in single-member districts (IRV/AV)
is a scheme for partisan advantage
The platform also said they would consider ranked ballots. Now, a ranked ballot is not a voting system; it is a ballot, which can be used in many systems. It can be used in proportional voting systems.
But the system
of single-member districts using “ranked” or “preferential” ballots (Instant Runoff
Voting or the Alternative Vote) still means voters are
voting against something, voting for a less-preferred candidate to block the
election of one even less preferred. It is still a winner-take-all system
And as Eric Grenier's really illuminating piece
showed, it advantages the Liberal Party in a big way. It has been called “First-Past-The-Post
on steroids.” It is obviously a scheme for partisan advantage. It is disrespectful to voters' genuine preferences. The 25% or 35% of those
who voted Liberal, who voted to stop Harper, would regard it as a betrayal of
the Liberal promise.
As
Stephane Dion says, the preferential ballot in single-member districts alone ”does nothing to correct the distortion between
votes and seats and the under-representation of national parties compared to
regional ones.” It makes only half
the votes count.
I cannot believe most Liberal MPs will support
it. Furthermore, they are well aware how they won. They would not dare get
caught in public supporting a scheme for partisan advantage.
What would respect for
Canada’s political diversity look like?
Can
we make every vote count, while ensuring that every Member of Parliament
represents actual Canadians and Canadian communities?
Let’s
look at Liberal Party voters in Canada’s diverse regions.
I am going to show two examples using a mixed-member system like the Law Commission of Canada recommendation. This is not the NDP model. Liberals know the Law Commission of Canada was an expert impartial Commission that they were proud of (and that the last government abolished). I am using it because it still has local MPs, unlike Stephane Dion's P3 model.
With any mixed-member model your second vote is for a party, and if you want to look at the list of 8 or 10 regional candidates under the party name, you can choose one if you wish. Simple but flexible, as shown in this six-minute video.
I am going to show two examples using a mixed-member system like the Law Commission of Canada recommendation. This is not the NDP model. Liberals know the Law Commission of Canada was an expert impartial Commission that they were proud of (and that the last government abolished). I am using it because it still has local MPs, unlike Stephane Dion's P3 model.
With any mixed-member model your second vote is for a party, and if you want to look at the list of 8 or 10 regional candidates under the party name, you can choose one if you wish. Simple but flexible, as shown in this six-minute video.
Five more Alberta Liberal MPs, on the 2015 votes on
a 30-region model:
Liberal
voters in the 11 ridings of Metropolitan Edmonton cast 26% of the votes, but
elected only two MPs. A proportional system would have let them elect another
MP like Karen Leibovici (former President of the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities and former MLA) or Kenya-born Accountant Beatrice
Ghettuba or former Beaumont
councillor Jacqueline Biollo. The preferential ballot would likely have been no help here.
Liberal
voters in the 11 ridings of Metropolitan Calgary cast 32% of the votes, but
elected only two MPs. A proportional system would have let them elect two more
MPs like television journalist Nirmala Naidoo and lawyer Matt Grant or lawyer
Kerry Cundal, whoever got the most support from Liberal voters across Calgary.
The preferential ballot would likely have been no help to Nirmala Naidoo or
Kerry Cundal.
Liberal
voters in the other 12 Alberta ridings cast 15% of the votes, but elected no
MPs. A proportional system would have let them elect two MPs like Chandra Kastern from Red Deer (Executive Director of the Red
Deer Symphony Orchestra) and General Manager of the McMurray Métis Kyle
Harrietha, or Medicine Hat economics professor Glen Allan, or Hinton Councillor Ryan Maguhn. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help here.
This
projection uses a mixed member model with 30 regions in the
10 provinces, of about 12 MPs each, with 38.2% of the MPs
elected in regions to top-up the disproportional local results. As shown in this six-minute video. But
that’s not the only option.
Moderate 42-region model
If
the government prefers a more moderate model, with regional MPs more locally
accountable, and a slightly higher proportion of local MPs, they might prefer a
model inspired by the UK’s Jenkins Report: about 8 MPs per region
in 42 regions, with 35.5% of the MPs elected in regions.
Alberta
would have four smaller regions. The overall results in Alberta would be
similar under either model, but Liberals outside Calgary and Edmonton would
have more accountable MPs.
Liberal
voters in South and Central Alberta’s nine ridings would have elected two MPs accountable to that region like Red Deer’s Chandra
Kastern and Medicine Hat’s Glen Allan or Canmore’s Marlo Raynolds. Liberal
voters in Northern Alberta’s six ridings would have elected an MP accountable
to that region like Fort McMurray’s Kyle Harrietha or Hinton's Ryan
Maguhn. The preferential
ballot would likely have been no help in either of those regions.
Five more Liberal MPs from west and
central Ontario
With
the smaller-region model, look at the Liberal voters in the six Windsor—Sarnia
ridings whose 28% of the votes elected no one. A
proportional system would have let them elect two MPs like Sarnia retired principal Dave McPhail and
public-relations professional Frank Schiller from Windsor, or young teacher Katie Omstead from Leamington. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help to Dave McPhail or Frank Schiller.
The
Liberal voters in the nine Mid-western ridings (London—Bruce) whose 39% of the
votes elected only two MPs would have elected a third MP like Owen Sound communications consultant Kimberley Love, or former St. Thomas city councillor Lori Baldwin-Sands, or
journalism professor Allan Thompson from Kincardine. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help to Kimberley
Love or Lori Baldwin-Sands.
The
Liberal voters in the six Central Ontario ridings around Barrie whose 39% of
the votes elected no one would have elected two MPs like Barrie’s former
College CEO Brian Tamblyn and Orillia’s former hospital CEO Liz Riley, or
aboriginal lawyer Trisha Cowie in Muskoka Lakes, or long-time Mayor of New Tecumseth Mike MacEachern.
With
the larger-region model, look at the Liberal
voters In the 11 ridings of southwestern Ontario whose 33% of those votes
elected only two MPs. A proportional system would have let them elect two more
MPs like Lori Baldwin-Sands in St. Thomas and Sarnia retired principal Dave
McPhail or Leamington’s Katie Omstead. The preferential ballot would likely have been no
help to Lori Baldwin-Sands or Dave McPhail.
In
the 15 ridings of West Central Ontario, Liberal voters cast 42% of the ballots,
while Conservative voters cast only 41%. Yet the region’s 15 MPs are ten
Conservatives and only five Liberals, all men. A proportional system would have
let voters in that region elect six Liberal MPs. Liberal voters might have
elected Orillia’s Liz Riley, Muskoka’s Trisha Cowie, or Owen Sound’s Kimberley
Love.
Four more
BC MPs outside the Lower Mainland
In BC’s Interior and North, Liberal voters cast 19% of the
votes but elected only one of the nine MPs.
A proportional system would have let them elect two more MPs like Metis
lawyer Karley
Scott from West Kelowna and CEO Tracy Calogheros from Prince George, or Salmon
Arm lawyer Cindy Derkaz, or Kamloops teacher Steve Powrie.
On
Vancouver Island, Liberal voters cast 21% of the
votes but elected none of the nine MPs. A
proportional system would have let them elect two MPs like lawyer David
Merner from Victoria and Councillor Carrie Powell-Davidson from the City of
Parksville, or Nanaimo Business Consultant Tim Tessier. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help here.
Two more
Saskatchewan MPs
In Saskatchewan, with the smaller region model, Liberal
voters in the six ridings of South Saskatchewan cast 26% of the votes and would
have elected (in addition to Ralph Goodale) a regional MP accountable to that
region like respected Indigenous academic, public administrator, and legal
expert Della Anaquod in Regina, or Regina councillor Louis Browne. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help here.
Liberal voters in the eight ridings of North Saskatchewan,
who cast 22% of those votes, would have elected a regional MP accountable to
that region like Saskatoon’s Tracy Muggli (Director of Mental Health and
Addiction Services) or aboriginal leader Lawrence Joseph from Prince Albert. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help to Tracy Muggli.
With the larger-region model the overall outcome would be the
same. Liberal voters cast 24% of the votes but elected only one of the 14 MPs.
A proportional system would have let them elect two more MPs such as Tracy
Muggli and Della Anaquod or Lawrence Joseph.
Two more Manitoba MPs
outside Winnipeg.
With the
smaller region model, the Liberal voters who cast
33% of the votes outside Winnipeg but elected none of those six MPs would have
elected two MPs like Brandon lawyer Jodi Wyman and aboriginal educator
Rebecca Chartrand or Springfield agriculture expert Terry Hayward or TV journalist Joanne Levy from Rockwood or former
RCMP officer Ray Piché. The
preferential ballot would likely have been no help to Jodi Wyman, Rebecca
Chartrand, Terry Hayward or Joanne Levy.
No more
strategic voting
The biggest result of using PR would be to end
strategic voting, and to let every voter help elect an MP
representing his or her first choice of views. In some ridings in BC and
elswhere, Liberal voters had to vote NDP to stop Harper. They know how NDP
supporters felt in the rest of Canada.
The other big result would be to end the parade of strongholds. Only an electoral system featuring proportionality will end the magnification of our regional differences rather than highlighting our common ground
Once our voting system respects Canada’s political diversity, it’s all up to the voters to decide, as it shouold be.
Once our voting system respects Canada’s political diversity, it’s all up to the voters to decide, as it shouold be.
How would regional MPs represent constituents?
Regional MPs would cover several ridings each. Just
the way it’s done in Scotland. They would
have several constituency offices, just as MP Bob Zimmer had three.
Design options
Please
note that there are many design options
for designing
a mixed-member proportional system.
Fair
Vote Canada supports only models that ensure all MPs have faced the voters (for example, no
closed lists.)
Many
Canadians want a simple, easy to understand ballot.
The
Scottish ballot, vote for local MP and for a party, qualifies.
But many
people hate closed party lists.
How to
square the circle?
Well, one
example of how to do it is the Law Commission of Canada
recommendation: your second vote is for a party, and if you want to look at the list
of 8 or 10 regional candidates under the party name, you can choose one if you wish.
Page 105 of the Law Commission Report said:
"Based
on the feedback received during our consultation process, many Canadian voters
would also most likely desire the flexibility of open lists in a mixed member
proportional system. In essence, allowing voters to choose a candidate from the
list provides voters with the ability to select a specific individual and hold
them accountable for their actions should they be elected."
And page
109:
"We
believe that a flexible list system represents a reasonable compromise for the
Canadian context. Elections Canada or other government body should therefore
develop a methodology for determining which candidate or candidates should be
awarded each list seat. Implementing a flexible list would send a signal to
voters about their primacy in the process of determining who gets elected. It
would also support voters who decide to trust a political party’s choice of
list candidates by allowing them to vote for the party slate.
Therefore:
Recommendation
5:
Within
the context of a mixed member proportional system, Parliament should adopt a
flexible list system that provides voters with the option of either endorsing
the party “slate” or “ticket,” or of indicating a preference for a candidate
within the list." This all satisfies Fair Vote Canada's principles:
"Positive
voter choice: We need fair and unrestricted competition among political parties
presenting democratically-nominated candidates. A democratic voting system must
encourage citizens to exercise positive choice by voting for the candidate or
party they prefer. They should not find it necessary to embrace negative or
strategic voting – to vote for a less-preferred candidate to block the election
of one even less preferred. Never should citizens be denied representation
simply because their preferred candidate cannot win a single-member
riding."
No comments:
Post a Comment