A Quick PR system

Look at this latest appeal for electoral reform, from Winnipeg author Alex Passey: “what better time than now to finally act on that dusty old election promise of electoral reform? After all, the Liberals have been stoking the fires with fears of what a majority government under the Pierre Poilievre Conservatives would mean for Canada and the world. . . . Introducing any of the many voting systems geared towards more proportional representation for the next election would almost certainly prevent the Conservatives from achieving a majority government. And all those arguments the Liberals made back in 2015 still stand.  . . . the Liberals have a chance to make history in these twilight days of their regime, by giving Canada the system of real representative government that they promised. There is still plenty of time and it would pass a parliamentary vote easily enough, as the under-represented parties would surely support such a motion.”

Plenty of time for the next election?

To do it properly, we would need a Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform, at least 121 people, who would spend months getting educated, more months holding hearings, and more months deliberating. Then we would need the usual Boundaries Commissions in each province to set up the new districts. Then Elections Canada would want seven months to organize and train for the new system.

But people keep saying this.

What if a new Liberal leader had an open mind? Can we find a quick system of proportional representation? One letting everyone still have a local MP, and using the new boundaries that have just come into effect?

Sure: the Mixed Member Proportional system used in Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, and others. Usually it would still have 56 or 58 percent of the MPs elected from local ridings, but for a quick model, we could have 51% elected from local ridings: just pair up today’s local ridings, and top up the results by electing regional MPs so that each party gets the share of the seats that its voters deserve.

You have two votes, one for your local MP, and one for the party you support. Your second vote helps elect regional MPs for top-up seats. In New Zealand, about 31% of voters vote for a local candidate of a different party than their party vote, giving local MPs an independent base of support.

Why would Liberal MPs in strongholds like Toronto agree to give up some of their seats? To stop a party (like the Conservatives) winning a false majority. And so that Liberal voters in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Southwestern Ontario, and elsewhere, can be fairly represented. As Stephane Dion loved to say “I do not see why we should maintain a voting system that makes our major parties appear less national and our regions more politically opposed than they really are.” 

Who gets elected to those regional seats? Using the model recommended by the Law Commission of Canada, your second vote would be for the regional candidate you prefer. A vote for a candidate counts for a vote for that candidate’s party.

But some candidates, such as incumbent MPs, have already been nominated for the new local ridings adopted by the Electoral Boundaries Commissions.  They can remain nominated for the double-sized riding, but in case of overlap, I expect one of the two candidates will become a regional candidate, unless there is a nearby vacant nomination available. Local decision.

Who would design the regions, and pair up the local ridings? I see three provinces where the ridings pair themselves. In the other seven, independent Commissions for each province could make short work of this job, validated by citizen panels. To prevent local sweeps, I am assuming regions of around 14 to 20 MPs. In Ontario that’s 7 regions ranging from 16 MPs to 24, average 17.4.

What would this look like? Just as an example, using the votes cast in 2021, but if the election were held next year, I doubt the People’s Party would get over 5% of the vote, and I am assuming a 5% threshold would be applied in each province. In 2021 the PPC got 5.4% in Ontario, but for simplicity I’ll ignore them. Today it’s the Conservatives who are under-represented, despite getting more votes than the Liberals, but it’s the Liberals who are at risk.

In Toronto’s 24 ridings, where the Liberals won all 24 with only 52% of the votes, on the votes cast in 2021 they would elect the 12 local MPs plus one regional MP, while the Conservatives would elect six regional MPs and the NDP five.

In Southwest Ontario’s 16 ridings, on the 2021 votes transposed to the new boundaries, today that’s 10 Conservatives with only 40% of the votes, 4 Liberals, and 2 NDP. With the twinned ridings, the Conservatives get only 7 MPs (6 local and 1 regional), while the Liberals would elect 5 MPs and the NDP 4.

What would Alberta look like? Instead of 35 Conservative MPs and 2 New Democrats (Randy Boissonnault’s slim majority evaporates with the new boundaries of Edmonton Centre), it would have 23 Conservative MPs (18 local, 5 regional), 7 Liberals (4 in Southern Alberta, 3 in Northern) and 7 New Democrats (3 in Southern Alberta, 4 in Northern). Similarly, Saskatchewan would have, not 13 Conservatives (new boundaries give the Liberals the Northern seat), but 9 (7 local, 2 provincial) plus 2 Liberals and 3 New Democrats.

Or take the 18 constituencies of Eastern Ontario. On the 2021 votes transposed to the new boundaries, that’s 9 Liberals, 9 Conservatives. With the twinned ridings, we get 3 Liberals and 6 Conservatives. Adding the nine top-up regional MPs, we get 3+5=8 Liberals, 6+1=7 Conservatives, and 3 NDP.

The total in Ontario on the 2021 votes would be 53 Liberals, 46 Conservatives and 23 NDP, assuming a 5% threshold. Maybe the Greens' 2021 total of 2.3% would become at least 5%. In that case, their Ontario total would likely be 3 MPs. In BC, this model would make little change on the 2021 votes except at least one more Green MP, but it would prevent a false majority sweep by one party. In Quebec, the new boundaries transfer two Liberal seats to the Bloc, and this model would take four more seats from the Liberals but give seven more seats to the NDP, while taking nine seats from the over-represented Bloc and giving six to the Conservatives.

Why am I using a 5% threshold? The Green total in BC, PEI and New Brunswick was already over 5%. In fact, on the 2021 votes this model would have elected Green candidate Anna Keenan as a PEI MP. If I was presenting to a Citizens Assembly I would argue for 4%. However, for a quick PR system the 5% used in Germany and New Zealand should be non-controversial, avoiding the risk of micro-parties.

How do we pair up the ridings in BC, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador, which have odd numbers of ridings? One riding is left unchanged, as Labrador must be. Do we give the three Territories an extra MP each, as recommended by the Law Commission of Canada, so they have one locally elected MP and one proportional top-up? I would, but for simplicity, not today.

Canada-wide results on this model: Liberal 125, Conservative 125, NDP 65, Bloc 25, Green 3. (Note that the new boundaries add 5 seats and already give 7 to the Conservatives and 2 to the Bloc, taking 3 from the Liberals and 1 from the NDP. My calculation assumes the votes as cast in 2021 but on new boundaries, with Green Party seats only on that basis, not adding the bump they may get, and no People’s Party seats.

Do Greens have more reasons for optimism than the PPC? Polls since Feb. 9, 2024, have averaged 4.3% for the Greens, almost double the 2.3% their disastrous 2021 campaign gave them. By contrast, the PPC has dropped from 4.9% in 2021 to 2.6% in polls since Feb. 9, 2024. In Ontario, in 2021 the Greens got 2.2%, presumably 4.1% today. Once every vote counts, the Greens can expect to do better.   

Final point: A Liberal-NDP agreement on quick PR might imply coalition-building and co-operation could be offered to voters ahead of time, as they are in other countries. Why not?