The turnout for the Liberal leadership election was quite variable

 The turnout for the Liberal leadership election was quite variable:

https://chefferie2025leadership.liberal.ca/results/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

In many regions this will be a polarizing election, where voters will vote Liberal or NDP to stop Poilievre. I have identified 15 ridings where the low Liberal leadership turnout may well presage success for the NDP.

For example, in Ontario, look at Humber River-Black Creek, which the NDP narrowly held in the recent provincial election on a turnout of only 35%, held federally by Liberal Judy Sgro (age 80) who is running again. Only 140 Liberals voted in this highly ethnic riding. Yet in Marco Mendicino’s Eglinton—Lawrence 860 Liberals voted. The Canada-wide average was 443.

NDP-held Windsor West saw only 304 Liberal voters; they ran no candidate provincially, and do not yet have a federal candidate. Look at London West: it had only 294 Liberal voters, even though its MP just made the cabinet, but provincially, its Liberals got only 11% against NDP MPP Peggy Sattler, while nearby London Fanshawe is NDP-held. The London West NDP has countered Liberal Arielle Kayabaga by nominating Shinade Allder; she is the first Black Chair of Unifor’s Ontario Regional Council.

See the new Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk where the NDP candidate Nicole Fortier Levesque has a transposed majority of 35.79% (mostly inherited from Charlie Angus) and the Liberals do not yet have a candidate: in the leadership race it had only 227 Liberal voters. And see the new Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, where the NDP stood second by (transposed) 846 votes in 2021, and 2021 candidate Andréane Chénier is running a strong campaign against Liberal Marc Serré. It had 302 Liberal voters, compared with 555 in Sudbury.

In Oshawa, 397 Liberal voters turned out; not bad, but well below Whitby’s 599 or Pickering—Brooklin’s 602.  Oshawa saw the Ontario Liberals get only 9% of the vote this year; looks like another NDP-Conservative battle.

Thunder Bay-Rainy River saw only 314 Liberal voters. They have a talented MP, aged 65, who has been overshadowed by his neighbour Patty Hajdu. The 2021 NDP candidate was a very close third and is running again.

In the one NDP seat in Quebec, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, only 188 Liberal supporters voted. Yet in the Liberal stronghold of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, 957 voted. What about Papineau, next-door to Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, a potential NDP gain with Trudeau no longer running there, replaced by a parachute from the PMO? Only 195 Liberals voted. And in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, where the NDP came 374 votes behind the Liberal in the by-election last year, only 282 Liberals voted; NDP Craig Sauvé is standing again while the Liberals have not yet nominated.

In Manitoba, in Niki Ashton’s riding of Churchill—Keewatinook Aski (with no Liberal candidate) they had only 45 Liberal voters. In NDP-held Elmwood-Transcona we find 234 Liberal votes, and 294 in NDP-held Winnipeg Centre. Compared these with nearby Winnipeg South, riding of minister Terry Duguid, where Liberals got 437 voters.

In Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, where the NDP has a transposed vote of 31.1%, Harjit Sajjan is not running again, and Liberals saw only 292 votes. Yet in North Vancouver-Capilano where BC’s sole minister Jonathan Wilkinson hopes to be re-elected, they saw 940 votes. In Randeep Sarai’s Surrey Centre, where the NDP stood second, Liberals saw only 178 votes. In Surrey-Newton where Sukh Dhaliwal seeks re-election, again with the NDP second, they saw only 207 votes.

If every vote counted, who would Ontario voters have elected in 2025?

Doug Ford’s PC voters cast 43.0% of the votes in Ontario’s 2025 election, but elected 64.5% of the MPPs, holding 100% of the power, a blank cheque. Proportional representation would have given them only 55 of the 124 MPPs (44.4%), assuming a threshold of 4% for a party to win seats.

If we had used province-wide proportionality the results would have been: 55 PC, 38 Lib, 24 NDP, 6 Green, and 1 independent.

But wait a minute: 24, when the NDP actually won 27? Doesn’t PR usually help the NDP? Yes, although as Thomas Mulcair explained in the 2015 campaign:
“Had the 2011 election used proportional representation, despite the NDP’s electoral gains, New Democrats would have actually had fewer seats in Parliament. Even still, we believe that democratic reform is critical to improving the health of Canada’s democracy. For New Democrats, it’s a matter of principle. Proportional representation would better represent Canadians across the country.”

In 2022 the Ontario NDP won 23.7% of the vote, but in 2025 only 18.5%. If you look at the seats the NDP actually won, you see an average turnout of 47.9%. The NDP missed winning Sault Ste. Marie by only 114 votes, with a turnout of 49.6%. But provincewide, only 45.4% of eligible voters cast ballots, 2.5% less. A lot of NDP voters stayed home where they didn’t see much chance of winning.  Voter turnout in countries with proportional representation is usually 7% or 8% higher. So the NDP’s higher turnout would give them more than the 18.5% of the vote they won, so more than 24 seats, in fact, more than the 27 seats they actually won. Looking at my simulation, NDP voters would have elected more MPPs in the three regions (out of eight) where they are now under-represented.

But the big winners would have been the Liberals. Curiously, some of them has been reluctant to support proportional representation.

Let’s see what would happen using the mixed-member proportional system (used in Germany, New Zealand and Scotland). Using eight regions, the regions would have an average of 15 MPPs each (nine local MPPs, six regional MPPs elected to top-up seats).

Open-list MMP

We’re not talking about a model with candidates appointed by central parties. We’re talking about the mixed member system designed by the Law Commission of Canada and endorsed by the Ontario NDP Convention in 2014, where every MPP represents actual voters and real communities. The majority of MPPs will be elected by local ridings as we do today, preserving the traditional link between voter and MPP. The other 40% are elected as regional MPPs, topping-up the numbers of MPPs from your local region so the total is proportional to the votes for each party.

You have two votes. One is for your local MPP. The second helps elect regional MPPs for the top-up seats. All MPPs have faced the voters. No one is guaranteed a seat. The region is small enough that the regional MPPs are accountable.

With open-list, the ballot would look like this ballot that PEI voters chose in their 2016 plebiscite. Unlike the closed-list MMP model Ontario voters did not support in 2007, you can cast a personal vote for a candidate within the regional list. This is commonly called “open list.”

Competing MPPs:

You have a local MPP who will champion your community, and about five competing regional MPPs, normally including one whose views best reflect your values, someone you helped elect in your local district or local region.

Surveys show Ontario voters support PR

More than three-in-five voters (62%) think Ontario should implement a system of proportional representation for provincial elections, up four points since 2022. What is striking about the findings this year is that voters aged 35-to-54 are more likely to desire a different system (67%) than their counterparts aged 18-to-34 (61%) and aged 55 and over (58%). In any case, we have majorities across all age groups who openly wonder whether a party should have so much control of the legislature with fewer than 50 per cent of all cast ballots.

How would regional MPPs serve residents?

See how it has worked in Scotland.

Note: this is only a simulation

In any election, as Prof. Dennis Pilon says: "Now keep in mind that, when you change the voting system, you also change the incentives that affect the kinds of decisions that voters might make. For instance, we know that, when every vote counts, voters won't have to worry about splitting the vote, or casting a strategic vote. Thus, we should expect that support for different parties might change." For this simulation I am assuming that Ontario still has only 124 MPPs.

In these local simulations, for the names of regional MPPs I use the local candidates who got the most votes in the region without winning the local seat. I expect they would be the most likely winners under open-list MMP. 

In Toronto and York’s 35 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected six more MPPs, such as Vince Gasparro (Eglinton-Lawrence), John Campbell (Etobicoke Centre), Chris Ballard (Newmarket-Aurora), Kelly Dunn (Markham-Stouffville), Holly Rasky (Toronto Centre) and April Engelberg (Spadina--Fort York). Green Party voters would have elected an MPP such as Jennifer Baron in York-Simcoe. NDP voters would have elected six MPPs. PC voters would have elected 15 MPPs.

In Peel Region’s 12 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected four or five MPPs, such as Bonnie Crombie, Elizabeth Mendes, Jill Promoli and Qasir Dar. NDP voters would have elected an MPP, such as George Nakitsas, Martin Singh or Ruby Zaman. The PCs would have elected six or seven MPPs.

In Central South’s (Hamilton--Niagara--Brantford--Halton) 15 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected four MPPs, such as Andrea Grebenc and Kaniz Mouli (Burlington), Alison Gohel (Oakville), and maybe Kristina Tesser Derksen (Milton) or Heino Doessing (Hamilton East-Stoney Creek). Green Party voters would have elected an MPP, such as Karleigh Csordas (Brantford). NDP voters would have elected three MPPs, PC voters six MPPs, and Independent Bobbi Ann Brady would have been re-elected.

In Central West’s (Waterloo--Simcoe) 14 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected four MPPs, such as Rose Zacharias (Barrie), Ted Crysler (Collingwood), Rob Deutschmann (Cambridge), and Alex Hilson (Halton Hills). NDP voters would have elected a second MPP, such as Jodi Szimanski (Wellesley Township, Waterloo Region). Green Party voters would still have elected two MPPs. PC voters would have elected six MPPs.

In Southwest Ontario’s 12 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected two MPPs, such as Douglas MacTavish (Elgin) and Cathy Burghardt-Jesson (Middlesex). Green Party voters would have elected an MPP, such as Stratford’s Ian Morton. NDP voters would have elected three MPPs, and PC voters would have elected six MPPs.

In East Central Ontario’s (Durham--Kingston) 13 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected three more MPPs, such as Peterborough’s Adam Hopkins, Whitby’s Roger Gordon, and Pickering’s Ibrahim Daniyal. NDP voters would have elected a second MPP, such as Peterborough’s Jen Deck. PC voters would have elected six MPPs.

In Ottawa-Cornwall’s 11 ridings, the results would have been very similar to the actual result.

In Northern Ontario’s 12 ridings, Liberal voters would have elected two MPPs, such as Thunder Bay’s Stephen Margarit and Algoma’s Reg Niganobe. NDP voters would have elected five MPPs, as would PC voters.

(Note: since this simulation uses eight regions, the Green party elected only five MPPs, rather than the six which provincewide proportionality would give them.)

An election today would give the Conservatives 100% of the power on 44% of the votes.

 The “338 Canada” website, featuring polling and electoral projections, projects that an election today would let Conservative voters elect 232 of Canada’s 343 MPs. With only 44% of the votes they would elect 68% of the MPs and hold 100% of the power. The Official Opposition would be the Bloc Québécois with 45 MPs.

The simplest model of proportional representation would 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. You cast your second vote for one of your party’s regional candidates. This vote would count as a vote for that candidate’s party. It would help elect region-wide candidates for top-up seats. The ballot would look like this sample from the PEI plebiscite in 2016 when PEI voters voted for MMP, the system used in Germany, New Zealand, and Scotland. In the four large provinces, that could be about 10 regional candidates. In the smaller provinces, maybe an average of 5 regional candidates.

Using the same “338” website riding projections as of Dec. 31, calculated over 20 regions, I project a simulated result of 159 Conservative MPs, 77 Liberals, 71 New Democrats, 29 Bloc, and 7 Greens.

Why would Liberal candidates in Liberal strongholds agree to give up nominations in half the ridings? To stop Pierre Poilievre winning a false majority.  Generally, candidates could remain nominated for the double-sized riding, but in case of overlap, I expect one of the two candidates would become a regional-only candidate, unless there is a nearby vacant nomination available. Local decision.

I am using 6 regions across Ontario, 4 across Quebec, and 2 in each of BC and Alberta, with an average region size of 20. The six smaller provinces have an average size of 10 MPs each. The 3 Territories are unchanged. (A Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform might decide a more representative Parliament needs more representatives, and the Law Commission of Canada would have given each Territory a second MP, but for simplicity I have left the number of MPs unchanged.)

With 177 local MPs and 166 regional or provincial MPs from top-up seats, the projected result is perfectly proportional. (I had one region in my projection with a bonus, the 18-MP Island of Montreal, because my initial pairings gave the NDP and Bloc each only 1 of the 9 paired seats, but the corrected pairings give the NDP two of the paired seats.) 

Could this really happen in 2025? Highly unlikely. The Liberals would have to elect a new leader who could reach a fast agreement with the NDP for quick implementation of this model. Each province would need quick Citizens Commissions to agree on the region boundaries, and on the pairings of the new ridings (already designed by the independent Electoral Boundaries Commissions in each province); and also the four cases where an odd number of ridings in the province would mean one riding remains unpaired, as Labrador obviously would. Elections Canada would complain they need more time to set up the new processes. As I said, unlikely to happen.  

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?

Nova Scotia 2024 election

 Nova Scotia voters elected a diverse legislature this week – but not as diverse as they deserved.

Tim Houston’s huge majority PC government got 43 of the 55 seats, with 78% of the MLAs, based on only 52.8% of the votes. The new opposition leader, Claudia Chender, leads an NDP caucus with nine MLAs, featuring seven women, including two newly elected women and two newly elected men, eight from Halifax, and one from Cape Breton. The decimated Liberals dropped from 17 MLAs to only two, one in Halifax, one in Cape Breton.

As Nova Scotia’s 2019 Boundary Commission report recommended:
“Recommendation 8: Although it is outside our mandate, we respectfully recommend that future governments consider consulting the public and elections experts about whether a proportional system would achieve more effective representation than our current single-member plurality (first past the post) system.”

Nova Scotia is more than just Halifax and Cape Breton.

In the 14 ridings of southwest Nova Scotia, including Kentville and Wolfville (home of Acadia University in Kings County), Bridgewater and Yarmouth, Liberal voters cast 26.7% of the votes. Under the Mixed Member Proportional system they would have elected four MLAs. Their four best runners-up were leader Zach Churchill in Yarmouth, incumbent MLA Carman Kerr in Annapolis County, incumbent MLA Ronnie LeBlanc in Clare, and Brian Casey, a West Hants farmer. NDP voters cast 13.1% of the votes and would have elected two MLAs: their best runners-up were former cabinet minister Ramona Jennex in Kings County and Kentville Town Councillor Gillian Yorke.

In the 11 ridings of Nova Scotia’s North Shore (Truro, New Glasgow, and Amherst), NDP voters cast 14.1% of the votes and would have elected two MLAs: their best runners-up were former local journalist Abby Cameron in Hants East and two-time candidate Janet Moulton in Musquodoboit Valley. Liberal voters cast 13.9% of the votes and would have elected two MLAs: their best runners-up were retired nurse Sheila Sears in Antigonish and New Glasgow musician Kris MacFarlane.

In the 22 Halifax ridings, Liberal voters cast 23.6% of the votes and would have elected four more MLAs. Their best runners-up were former Liberal cabinet ministers Patricia Arab and Ben Jessome, and MLAs Braedon Clark and Ali Duale.

In the eight ridings of Cape Breton, Liberal voters cast 25.1% of the votes and would have elected a second MLA. Their best runner-up was Jamie Beaton, born and raised in Inverness.

This assumes the Mixed Member Proportional system used in Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, and others. Usually it would still have 56 or 60 percent of the MLAs elected from local ridings. With the model recommended by the Law Commission of Canada, using the ballot PEI voters supported in their 2016 plebiscite, you have two votes, one for your local MLA, and one for the party you support. Your second vote helps elect regional MLAs 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.

Of course, this is only a simulation. In any election, as Prof. Dennis Pilon says: "Now keep in mind that, when you change the voting system, you also change the incentives that affect the kinds of decisions that voters might make. For instance, we know that, when every vote counts, voters won't have to worry about splitting the vote, or casting a strategic vote. Thus, we should expect that support for different parties might change." 

    

Far-fetched scenario #1

 Far-fetched scenario #1 (Oct. 14, 2024)

When Quebec’s Charest government tabled a bill for a Proportional Representation system for Quebec in 2004, after going through their caucus it featured little 5-MNA regions – 3 local MLAs, and 2 regional MNAs for top-up seats.

There was an all party-consensus for PR in Quebec since the 2003 election. But after public hearings and negative reaction to this model, the Select Committee of the National Assembly recommended in April 2006 that the model be changed to better reflect Quebec’s political diversity. More proportional, that is, with larger regions. But the Quebec Liberal caucus were not too happy with more diverse MLAs. The model went back to the drawing boards, where it stayed. For years, up to the Liberal defeat in 2012, the government’s Minister for Democratic Reform kept saying the government was still committed to PR, the problem was the model.

When Justin Trudeau was first nominated in 2007 and elected as an MP in 2008, the only discussion of PR among Liberals in Quebec was at the provincial level, where the issue was the size of the regions.

In the 2006 Liberal leadership race Justin Trudeau had supported Stephane Dion on the final ballot. In April 2012 Stephane Dion proposed a “moderate PR” model with five-seat regions called “P3.”

In January 2013 Justin Trudeau was running for the Liberal leadership, and stopped in Port Hope, where I got the chance for a brief chat. I asked him to support the report of the Law Commission of Canada (2004). He seemed not very familiar with it, and asked “how big are the regions?” I gave him an honest answer: “in the range of 8 to 14.” I wonder what he would have said if I had answered “could be as small as five.” But he rejected my answer, and said he could not support that.

Fast-forward to today. The Liberals face a wipeout by the Conservatives even if they win only 40% of the vote. Justin Trudeau is still talking of the ranked ballot as the way to prevent this, but the NDP will never support a system which usually favours no party but the Liberals.

A historic compromise

Now, suppose a Liberal leader (either Justin Trudeau or a successor) proposes a historic compromise: an agreement with the NDP for immediate adoption of two bills. The first will implement a ranked ballot for the next election, but only for one election. The second bill will implement a moderate proportional system, a mixed-member proportional model with five-MP regions – the Charest 2004 model. (It also had a few 3-MP regions and a few 7-MP regions). The government would immediately appoint Boundaries Commission for each province to group the ridings used this year into regions of an average of five MPs, to be used for the new system in the next election after this year. Elections Canada would want seven months to implement the new PR system; they would have it.

This presupposes that the 2025 election would, with ranked ballots, produce a Liberal-NDP alliance to last until implementation of the new system. On current polls, I think it would.

The Charest model

How bad would it be? It would not give representation to Canada’s full diversity. The fourth party in a region would seldom win a seat, such as the NDP in Quebec, the Greens, and the Peoples Party.

But it would accomplish the major objectives of proportional representation: 1) that no government should have a false majority with only 40% or 42% support; and 2) that partisan regional disparities should be prevented.

So as an exercise I have done a projection of the 2021 vote on the new boundaries using the Charest model, with 70 small regions, plus 3 remote single seats, total 207 local seats and 136 top-up, with regions of (average) 4.75 seats. Liberal voters in Alberta would elect 5 MPs (3 more, such as Sabrina Grover and Murray Sigler in Calgary, and Ben Henderson in Edmonton). Saskatchewan Liberals would elect two MPs, such as Buckley Belanger and Sean McEachern. BC Interior Liberals would elect 2 MPs, such as Tim Krupa from Kelowna and Jesse McCormick from Kamloops. Vancouver Island Liberals would elect an MP such as Victoria’s Dr. Nikki Macdonald. 

Westman Liberal voters would have elected an MP such as Shirley Robinson. In Ontario, West-Central Ontario Liberals would have elected a second MP such as Melanie Lang from Wellington County. Simcoe County Liberals would have elected an MP like Cynthia Wesley-Esquimaux. East-Central Ontario Liberals would have elected an MP such as Belleville’s Neil Ellis. Mid-East Ontario Liberals would have elected another MP such as Frontenac’s Mike Bossio. In Quebec, Liberal voters would have elected three more MPs in the regions such as Terrebonne’s Eric Forget, Shefford’s Pierre Breton and Jonquière’s Stéphane Bégin.

NDP voters would have elected 41 more MPs, including 7 more in Alberta, 21 more in Ontario, 3 in Saskatchewan, 6 in Atlantic Canada, 2 in BC (Sonia Andhi in Surrey Centre and Danielle (D J) Pohl in Chilliwack—Hope), and even 4 in Quebec, but not the 8 they deserved in Quebec.

Green voters would had have added an MP: Anna Keenan in PEI. And likely a handful more if their vote went up as I expect it would. 

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?

Brian Mulroney`s Legacy was crippled by First-Past-The-Post

The late Brian Mulroney`s legacy was crippled by Canada`s disastrous 1993 election, when his 1988 majority collapsed to 2 seats under Kim Campbell, who deserved better.

But wait a minute. In 1993 the Bloc Quebecois got only 13.5% of the vote, standing in fourth place, yet formed the Official Opposition with 54 seats. At the same time Kim Campbell`s PCs got 16.0% worth only 2 seats, while Reform got 18.7% of the votes but its 52 seats left it short of the Bloc. Was this election rigged?

Yes, by First Past The Post. A few years later, beginning in 2001 the Law Commission of Canada under Prof. Nathalie Des Rosiers took a look at that result. In their 2004 Report ``Voting Counts`` they noted Prof. Henry Milner`s conclusion: after the 1997 federal election “the results of Canada’s last two federal elections are becoming political science textbook cases of the distortions under [first-past-the-post].” “The first-past-the-post electoral system, with its two dominant parties, appeared unable to accommodate the pressures of regionalism.” Our winner-take-all voting system exaggerates Canada’s regional differences.

So what would the results have been under proportional representation on the votes cast in 1993, calculated province-by-province, with a 5% threshold in each province, and three extra MPs for the Territories? Liberals 131, Reform 58, PCs 51, Bloc 39, NDP 19, total 298. The Liberals would have had no artificial majority, needing NDP support. The Leader of the Opposition would have been Preston Manning, not Lucien Bouchard.

The Law Commission in 2004 recommended Canada adopt a Mixed Member Proportional system, as used in Germany, Scotland and New Zealand but with open regional lists. “Two-thirds of the members of the House of Commons should be elected in constituency races using first-past-the-post (in larger ridings, three ridings becoming two), and the remaining one-third should be elected from regional party lists” to top-up the results by a flexible list system that provides voters with the option of either endorsing the party list or of voting for a candidate within the list. In addition, one top-up seat each should be allotted to Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and Yukon.

As for the 1993 PCs, instead of Jean Charest being one of only two MPs, he and Kim Campbell would have had company, under no pressure to merge with Reform. These names will bring back memories of the end of the Mulroney era:

18 MPs from Ontario (maybe Ministers Perrin Beatty, Rob Nicholson, Tom Hockin, Doug Lewis, Garth Turner, Paul Dick, and Pauline Browes, maybe former Speaker John Bosley, and maybe David MacDonald, Barbara Greene, Patrick Boyer, Bill Attewell and Alan Redway);

9 more MPs from Quebec (maybe Ministers Gilles Loiselle, Pierre Blais, Gerry Weiner, Monique Landry, Jean Corbeil, and Pierre Vincent, and maybe Deputy Speaker Andrée Champagne and Jean-Pierre Blackburn);

5 MPs from BC (Kim Campbell, and maybe Ministers Tom Siddon and Mary Collins);

4 MPs from Alberta (maybe Ministers Jim Edwards and Bobbie Sparrow, and Lee Richardson and Jim Hawkes);

3 MPs from Nova Scotia (Maybe Minister Peter McCreath, and maybe Bill Casey);

2 more MPs from New Brunswick (maybe Minister Bernard Valcourt)

2 MPs from Manitoba (maybe Minister Charles Mayer, and maybe Dorothy Dobbie);

2 MPs from Saskatchewan (maybe Minister Larry Schneider);

2 MPs from Newfoundland and Labrador (maybe Minister Ross Reid); and 1 MP from PEI, and 1 MP from Nunavut.

How would regional MPs serve residents? See how it worked in Scotland in 2013. 

The MMP ballot would look like this ballot that PEI voters chose in their 2016 plebiscite, unlike the closed-list MMP model Ontario voters did not support in 2007. The open-regional-list mixed-member model is used in the German province of Bavaria.

You have two votes. One is for your local MP. The second helps elect regional MPs for the top-up seats. All MPs have faced the voters. No one is guaranteed a seat. The region is small enough that the regional MPs are accountable.  

Competing MPs: You have a local MP who will champion your community, and at least four competing regional MPs, normally including one whose views best reflect your values, someone you helped elect in your local district or local region. 

The Jenkins Commission in the UK had a colourful explanation accurately predicting why closed lists would be rejected in Canada: additional members locally anchored 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.” 

Of course, this is only a simulation. In any election, as Prof. Dennis Pilon says: "Now keep in mind that, when you change the voting system, you also change the incentives that affect the kinds of decisions that voters might make. For instance, we know that, when every vote counts, voters won't have to worry about splitting the vote, or casting a strategic vote. Thus, we should expect that support for different parties might change." NDP voters would not have switched to the Liberals to stop Reform.

Does Canada need a new Centre Party?

 Two prominent “Blue Liberals” wrote June 30 “Where is the Purple Party?

John Manley is a former deputy prime minister. Martha Hall Findlay is a former MP who ran for the Liberal leadership. They wrote “As former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole pointed out in his final speech in the House of Commons: “Canada has been slowing down at a time when the world is asking us to speed up.” Former Liberal finance minister Bill Morneau stressed this same concern about Canada dramatically falling behind and not achieving its potential in his recent book, Where To From Here. “. . . many Canadians might now be responsive to a more centrist approach, perhaps a “radical centre.” “What is needed is openness to ideas unconstrained by the labels of “right” and “left,” working instead on moving forward. We and a good number of other Canadians have, over the years, joked in asking, “Where is the Purple Party?” Not in the middle, but taking the best from the “red,” and the best from the “blue.”

Of course, the winner-take-all First Past The Post system discourages any third parties.

However, making every vote count with proportional representation has allowed centrist governments in Europe. Germany has six parties: the governing centre-left coalition excludes the Left Party and the two conservative parties, but includes the centrist liberal Free Democrats.

In the 16 German states, ten have centrist coalition governments. The national three-party left-centre coalition is in power in Rhineland-Palatinate, while a three-party Grand Coalition (Christian Democrats, Social Democrats and Free Democrats) governs Saxony-Anhalt. In seven states the centrist coalition is a Grand Coalition of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats and/or Greens. In Bavaria the centrist Free Voters are in the governing coalition That leaves two states with a Social Democrat-Green coalition, one state with a Social Democrat one-party government, and three states where the Left Party is part of the governing coalition; but nowhere is the hard-right AfD in cabinet.      

It's not just Germany. After last year’s election in Denmark, the governing Social Democrats decided to form a centrist coalition of the three largest parties, the other two being the centre-right liberals and the centrist Moderates. Austria has a conservative-Green coalition government.

By contrast, look at the one country where a new centrist party tried to beat the odds by taking power in a winner-take-all system: Macron’s party in France. By a fluke, he did, once.

The 2012 election for the French National Assembly, using a winner-take-all two-round system, followed the victory of Socialist Party candidate François Hollande as President, defeating incumbent conservative Nicolas Sarkozy. The Socialist Party and allies won 58% of the seats, while the conservatives won 40%. Rightist Marine Le Pen’s National Front won 14% in the first round but few of its candidates advanced to the second round and only two won seats. Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s Left Front got only 7% in the first round and won only 10 seats. Both Le Pen and Mélenchon were defeated.

Centrist François Bayrou had run third for President with 19% in 2007, but ran fifth in 2012 with only 9%, and in the National Assembly election his party got less than 2% and only 2 seats. A total two-party environment.

But in 2016 Emmanuel Macron, a minister in Hollande’s Socialist government, resigned to launch his own new centrist movement to support his presidential campaign. Centrist François Bayrou announced support for Macron.

Luckily for Macron, incumbent François Hollande had become so unpopular that he did not seek re-election in 2017. Hollande’s candidate Manuel Valls was defeated for nomination as the Socialist Party candidate by his left-wing rival Benoit Hamon, but Mélenchon out-shone him. Also boosting Macron’s campaign was the scandal of the moderate conservative (Republican) candidate François Fillon, who won his party’s primary but the national financial prosecutor then placed him under formal investigation for misuse of public funds and fraud, for putting his wife and children on the payroll. Marine Le Pen became the strongest conservative candidate, and the vote for the first round was Macron 24%, Le Pen 21%, Fillon 20%, Mélenchon 19.6%, and Hamon only 6.4%. For the second round, to stop Le Pen both Fillon and Hamon supported Macron who got 66% of the vote.

But Macron’s project had no roots. In 2021 in the 12 Regional Council elections the winning traditional parties in 2015 all retained control in 2021: moderate conservatives in seven regions, Socialists and their allies in five regions. Macron’s centrists got only 11% overall, ranging from 11.1% to 16.6% of the votes in 8 regions, while in 3 they were under 10%. In those 11 regions they were shut out of positions in the cabinets of the regional government. In only one region were they part of a grand coalition with moderate conservatives against Le Pen.

And Macron’s project failed to show enough staying power. in the 2022 election Macron lost his majority, getting only 245 seats. The new Left Alliance got 153 seats, Le Pen 89, moderate conservatives 64, others 26. 

A first incremental step to proportionality in 2025, along with a Citizens Assembly.

Will the Liberals accept the NDP motion for a Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform? Well, for two weeks they filibustered the NDP motion for Katie Telford to be questioned. But when Jagmeet stood his ground “very firmly” the Liberals blinked, showing the Liberal-NDP confidence and supply agreement was solid. The Liberal MPs on the PROC Committee already voted for a Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform. They should be expected to do so again. 

Now that the CASA agreement seems on track to continue to 2025, the next election will likely be under the new Boundaries, which apply to any election called after April 2024, more or less. 

A Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform will be no help in a 2025 election. Could the Liberals accept an additional element: a small first step? The NDP and Greens already offered this option in their Supplementary Opinion to the ERRE Report: “The government could decide to take an incremental approach by adding regional compensatory MPs in groups of 30-45 over the next three or four elections.” 

The Liberals don’t want to risk the Conservatives getting unbridled power without a majority of votes. The Conservatives similarly don’t want the Liberals to have unbridled power without a majority of votes. An incremental step would give Parliament more diverse voices, give voters more choices, reduce toxic partisanship, and reflect the democratic value of making every vote count, to a limited extent. 

The new Boundaries are for 343 Electoral Districts, an increase of only 5 from the current 338. However, the population of Canada increased by 10.501% from 2011 to 2021. That could easily justify adding 35 seats, not just 5. Therefore, the first step could be adding 30 regional compensatory seats. 

The 30 additional seats would be layered over the 340 Districts in the 10 provinces (plus 3 in the Territories), established by the current Boundaries Commissions (see list below). The additional MPs would go to the most unrepresented voters in each region. The ballot would not change.

What would that look like?

A real PR system would likely have a 5% threshold. An incremental step is aimed at major parties, so it would want to use a higher threshold. I am using 8%. Compared to 5%, this costs the PPC four seats. (Bloc Québecois voters are represented in each Quebec region now.) 

We do not yet know the transposed results on the new 343 districts, so I’ll have to start with the 2021 results. I allocate the 30 additional seats by the Swedish method: an “adjustment seat” to the most unrepresented party in the region. Each party has a quotient in each region, which is its number of votes in the region divided by (2n+1), where n is the number of MPs elected. If a party has no MP in the region, its quotient simply is the number of votes it received. In a region, the party with the highest quotient is awarded an additional seat, and a new quotient is then calculated for that region before the next seat is distributed. A region can thus receive more than one additional seat. 

Simulation

My simulation gives the 30 additional MPs to three parties: the NDP 20 in eight provinces, the underrepresented Conservatives 6 (2 Montreal, 2 Vancouver, 1 GTA and 1 PEI), and the underrepresented Liberals 4 (2 BC outside Vancouver, 1 Alberta, and 1 Eastern Quebec). Adding those 30 MPs to the 2021 results, we get 163 Liberals, 125 Conservatives, 45 NDP, 33 Bloc, and 2 Greens. A majority of the 368 seats is 185. The risk of any one party getting 185 is reduced. 

With only 30 additional MPs, I assume they would be the “best runners-up” in each region, the defeated candidates with the highest % of support.  All three parties would have a more representative caucus. I make the additional 30 MPs 18 women and 3 indigenous. 

Note: this is only a simulation. In any election, as Prof. Dennis Pilon says: "Now keep in mind that, when you change the voting system, you also change the incentives that affect the kinds of decisions that voters might make. For instance, we know that, when every vote counts, voters won't have to worry about splitting the vote, or casting a strategic vote. Thus, we should expect that support for different parties might change." 

For the Liberals that would be one from Alberta like Ben Henderson, Edmonton City Councillor since 2007, who ran in Amarjeet Sohi’s old seat. One from the BC Interior like Kelowna’s Tim Krupa, who went from Kelowna to an MBA at Oxford, worked in the PMO for three years, and on to Harvard and the CPP, giving a voice in caucus (and cabinet?) to the BC Interior where the Liberals were shut out. Another from BC like Dr. Nikki Macdonald, University of Victoria Professor and environment leader. And one from Eastern Quebec like their new star candidate, well-known unionist Ann Gingras, long-time President of the CSN’s regional council, previously a critic of the Liberals but recruited this time by Justin Trudeau himself. 

The Conservatives would not have lost two of their Vancouver incumbents: Alice Wong and Tamara Jensen, and their Richmond Hill incumbent Leona Alleslev. They would have gained their star Montreal candidate, Frank Cavallaro, a household name across Montreal as a radio journalist and the main weather presenter at CFCF-CTV Montreal for 17 years, and another Montreal candidate Terry Roberts, along with former banker Jody Sanderson in PEI. 

The NDP would have elected Edmonton Métis union labour relations officer Charmaine St. Germain and former Edmonton school trustee Heather MacKenzie, Executive Director of Solar Alberta. Saskatoon’s Robert Doucette, former president of the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. From Winnipeg, community development worker Melissa Chung-Mowat, a second generation Chinese Canadian and a Métis woman. Sudbury’s Nadia Verrelli, university professor. In Toronto, Alejandra Bravo (now a city councillor); school trustee Norm Di Pasquale; and former FoodShare Director Paul Taylor, with origins in Saint Kitts. London engineer Dirka Prout, with origins in Trinidad. CUPE economist Angella MacEwen. Former Queen’s professor, Guyanese-born Vic Sahai. Former MPs Tracey Ramsey and Malcolm Allen. Montreal star candidate Nimâ Machouf; lawyer and former Montreal MP Ève Péclet; former Quebec MP Ruth Ellen Brosseau; and Tommy Bureau in Quebec City. Moncton’s Serge Landry, Canadian Labour Congress Representative. Former MLA Lisa Roberts in Halifax. Mary Shortall, president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour. 

The provincial breakdown would be:

British Columbia 43+4 (in 2 regions)

Alberta 37+3

Saskatchewan 14+1

Manitoba 14+1

Ontario 122+10 (in 4 regions)

Quebec 78+7 (in 3 regions)

New Brunswick 10+1

PEI 4+1

Nova Scotia 11+1

Nfld & Lab.  7+1

 

Before the 2021 election, I described another variation of a compromise model:

http://wilfday.blogspot.com/2020/11/when-pierre-trudeau-supported.html 

If Saskatchewan had a democratic voting system in 2020 . . .

After the 2020 election, communities in all of Saskatchewan outside Regina, Saskatoon and the two northern ridings have no voice in the opposition. They have no local voice to question any government action or inaction. Their regions face one-party rule.

With a regional open-list Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system such as the Law Commission of Canada recommended, if Saskatchewan voters voted as they did in 2020 (and assuming the Green vote doubled with PR, as one can normally assume), they would have elected 38 Saskatchewan Party MLAs, 20 New Democrats, and three Greens.

With MMP, we still elect the majority of MLAs locally. Voters unrepresented by the local results top them up by electing regional MLAs. The total MLAs match the vote share. With the regional "Open list" version, voters can vote for whomever they like out of the regional candidates nominated by the party's regional nomination process. Like this ballot that won the 2016 referendum in PEI.  

See MMP Made Easy.

I’m using a model with almost 40% of the MLAs elected regionally, in five regions. Eleven local ridings would generally become seven larger ones. My simulation has 39 local MLAs and 22 elected regionally. 

Assumption about Green Party

I am not a Green Party supporter, but it is well-known that pre-election polls generally show Green Party support at double the level of Green votes cast on election day. Half of Green Party supporters vote “strategically” for another party, or stay home. When every vote counts, the Green Party vote will generally double. In the 2020 election, 2.25% of votes went to the Green Party, so my projection assumes this will become 4.5%. Most proportional voting system have a threshold of 5% or 4% of the votes for a party to win representation. With only 61 MLAs, the right threshold for Saskatchewan would be 4%. In 2020, the new Buffalo Party got 2.54%, but I have no reason to project their vote under PR to go above 4%, so my projection does not include Buffalo Party MLAs. 

Five regions

Problems with your Area Clinic in Weyburn, Moose Jaw, Swift Current, Rosetown, North Battleford, Prince Albert, Tisdale, or Yorkton? Who're ya gonna call?

The 12 MLAs from the southwest (Moose Jaw-Swift Current-Weyburn-Kindersley) are all from the Saskatchewan Party. Although 20% of those voters voted NDP, they have no voice in the opposition. Instead of a SP sweep, my spreadsheet projects two New Democrats, once NDP votes count equally with SP voters, and a Green. That would be the two regional NDP candidates who got the most votes across the region. Maybe NDP voters would have elected Melissa Patterson from Moose Jaw and Stefan Rumpel from Swift Current, and Green voters Kimberly Soo Goodtrack from Wood Mountain Lakota First Nation. (Stefan Rumpel told voters he wants proportional representation because it can increase diversity in government.)

The 12 MLAs in that region would become eight local, four regional. The SP would no doubt have won all eight local seats, so those SP voters would even elect one of the regional MLAs.

Voters in the 13 Regina-region districts (including Indian Head - Milestone) would have elected six NDP MLAs, not just five. Perhaps Bhajan Brar? And they would have elected Green Party leader Naomi Hunter.

For the 10 MLAs from Yorkton-Melfort-Humboldt, instead of the SP winning them all, we'd see two New Democrats. That would be the two regional NDP candidates who got the most votes across the region (maybe Thera Nordal from Southey, east of Last Mountain Lake, and Stacey Strykowski from Preeceville near Yorkton). The 10 MLAs in that region would be six local, four regional, so those SP voters would even elect two of the regional MLAs. 

The 15 ridings of the Saskatoon-region (including Martensville-Warman) were less skewed. We’d still see six NDP, and along with eight SP we'd see a Green Party MLA: perhaps Delanie Passer? 

For the 11 MLAS from Prince Albert, Lloydminster & North, the NDP would have elected two more: maybe incumbent Prince Albert MLA Nicole Rancourt, and Amber Stewart from The Battlefords.

Of course, this projection simplistically assumes voters would have cast the same ballots they did in 2020. The reality would be different. When every vote counts, we typically see around 8% higher turnout. And one recent study suggested 18% of voters might vote differently. No more strategic voting. We would likely have had different candidates -- more women, and more diversity of all kinds. Who knows who might have won real democratic elections?

Different candidates: when the SP members from Moose Jaw-Swift Current-Weyburn-Kindersley met in a regional nominating convention, they would have not only voted to put the eight local nominees on the regional ballot, but also would have added several regional candidates. With only one woman from the eight local ridings, when they nominated several additional regional candidates, they would have naturally wanted to nominate a diverse group: more women. In 2020 Saskatchewan elected 17 women and 44 men. But 90% of Canadian voters say that, if parties would nominate more women, they'd vote for them.

Note: this is only a simulation

In any election, as Prof. Dennis Pilon says: "Now keep in mind that, when you change the voting system, you also change the incentives that affect the kinds of decisions that voters might make. For instance, we know that, when every vote counts, voters won't have to worry about splitting the vote, or casting a strategic vote. Thus, we should expect that support for different parties might change."

In these local simulations, for the names of regional MPPs I use the local candidates who got the highest percent in the region without winning the local seat. They would be the most likely winners under open-list MMP,

The open-list Mixed-Member Proportional system: 

Every MLA represents actual voters and real communities. 

We’re not talking about a model with candidates appointed by central parties. We’re talking about the mixed member system designed by the Law Commission of Canada, where every MLA represents actual voters and real communities. The majority of MLAs will be elected by local ridings as we do today, preserving the traditional link between voter and MLA. The other 36% are elected as regional MLAs, topping-up the numbers of MLAs from your local region so the total is proportional to the votes for each party. 

You have two votes. One is for your local MLA. The second helps elect regional MLAs for the top-up seats. All MLAs have faced the voters. No one is guaranteed a seat. The region is small enough that the regional MLAs are accountable. 

Competing MPPs:

You have a local MPP who will champion your community, and at least four competing regional MPPs, normally including one whose views best reflect your values, someone you helped elect in your local district or local region. 

How would regional MLAs serve residents?

See how it works in Scotland. 

The ballot would look like this ballot that PEI voters chose in their 2016 plebiscite, unlike the closed-list MMP model Ontario voters did not support in 2007. The open-regional-list mixed-member model is used in the German province of Bavaria, and was recommended by Canada's Law Commission and by Scotland's Arbuthnott Commission.

However, when Quebec’s Chief Electoral Officer reported In December 2007 on a compensatory mixed system, he reviewed several options for the design of a mixed proportional model for Quebec. He leaned towards an open list system with a party option: giving voters the choice of using their second ballot to vote for a party or one of its regional candidates. This would help parties that choose to present a “zippered” list, alternative women and men. 

The Jenkins Commission in the UK had a colourful explanation accurately predicting why closed lists would be rejected in Canada: additional members locally anchored 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.”

Technical Notes:

1.    The calculation for any PR system has to choose a rounding method, to round fractions up and down. I have used the “largest remainder” calculation, which Germany used until recently, because it is the simplest and most transparent. In a 10-MPP region, if Party A deserves 3.4 MPPs, Party B deserves 3.1, Party C deserves 2.3, and Party D deserves 1.2, which party gets the tenth seat? Party A has a remainder of 0.4, the largest remainder. In a region where one party wins a bonus (“overhang”), I allocate the remaining seats among the remaining parties by the same calculation.

2. The purpose of the compensatory regional seats is to correct disproportional local results, not to provide a parallel system of getting elected. The Law Commission of Canada recommended that the right to nominate candidates for regional top-up seats should be limited to those parties which have candidates standing for election in at least one-third of the ridings within the top-up region. The UK’s Jenkins Commission recommended 50%. This prevents a possible distortion of the system by parties pretending to split into twin decoy parties for the regional seats, the trick which Berlusconi invented to sabotage Italy’s voting system.