Andrew Coyne, First past the
post sets Canada up for secession threats.
Globe and Mail, Oct. 13:
``We have an electoral system that seems almost
purpose-built to divide us.
Albertans complain that they have not been listened to. In
the last election, for example, the Liberals won 28 per cent of the vote in
Alberta, their best showing since 1968. Yet they still won just two of the
province’s 37 seats. Whereas the Liberals have been able to win a majority of
the seats in Quebec or Ontario with as little as 36 per cent and 39 per cent of
the vote respectively.
Suppose, instead, we had a system in which a party’s share
of the seats more closely resembled its share of the popular vote. Then not
only would every party be able to win seats across the country – every party
would have to do so, to have any hope of governing.
We would at last have a truly national politics. No longer
would it be possible to play one region off against another. Parties would have
to appeal to the whole country at the same time.``
With 11 Liberal MPs, Liberals could have gotten 3 of the 29
cabinet ministers not just one, reflecting Alberta’s 10.8% of Canada’s MPs.
So let`s look at Alberta’s 37 MPs who would have been elected
in 2025 under proportional representation.
What PR model should we use for this projection?
The new federal NDP PR policy says “a made-in-Canada
model of mixed member PR that is regionally-based and ensures local
representation using a combination of single-member and/or multi-member
districts, combined with top-up seats as required to ensure proportionality.”
Plan A (MMP): 22 local single-member districts combined
with 15 top-up seats (regional or province-wide) as required to ensure
proportionality.
Plan B (Regional-Mixed-Member): a combination of
single-member (8) and multi-member districts (4), combined with top-up seats as
required (3) to ensure proportionality: single-member ridings as may be
deemed appropriate in rural and “small-urban” areas involving cities and towns
of less than 100,000 residents.
Plan A (with 2 regions):
In the 2025 election, in the 19 ridings of South Alberta,
Conservative voters cast 66.0% of the three-party vote, entitling them to elect
12 MPs (10 local, 2 regional) not 18; Liberal voters cast 30.3% of the votes,
entitling them to elect 6 MPs (1 local, 5 regional) not just one; and NDP
voters cast 3.7% of the voters, entitling them to elect one regional MP not
none. In the 18 ridings of North Alberta, Conservative voters cast 63.9% of the
three-party vote, entitling them to elect 11 MPs (9 local, 2 regional) not 16;
Liberal voters cast 26.6% of the votes entitling them to elect 5 MPs (1 local,
4 regional) not just one; and NDP voters cast 9.5% of the votes entitling them
to elect 2 MPs (1 local, 1 regional) not just one.
The regional MPs would have been the regional candidates who
got the most votes on the regional open lists. (P.S. By using two regions for
this projection, the NDP picks up a bonus of 1 from the Conservatives, so the
total is 23 Conservative MPs, 11 Liberals, 3 NDP.)
Plan B:
In the Calgary Census Metropolitan Area (including Airdrie-Cochrane),
with 12 MPs, this region would have elected 11 MPs (7 Conservatives, 4
Liberals), shrunk by 1 to allow for 3 top-up MPs. In Edmonton CMA (including Edmonton
Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan, St. Albert-Sturgeon River, Parkland, and
Leduc-Wetaskiwin), with 13 MPs, this region would have elected 12 MPs (7
Conservatives, 4 Liberals, 1 NDP), again shrunk by 1 to allow for 3 top-up MPs.
In Lethbridge-Medicine Hat, the 2 MPs would have been one Conservative and 1
Liberal. In Red Deer-Ponoka both the 2 MPs would have been Conservatives. In
the 8 single member ridings, shrunk to 7 to allow for 3 top-up MPs, 7
Conservative MPs. The three top-up MPs are 2 Liberals and 1 NDP. Total: 24
Conservative MPs, 11 Liberals, 2 NDP.
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."
(P.S. FVC`s website on Regional-Mixed-Member says voters
elect MPs from multi-member ridings by making a mark next to one candidate of
their choice from a party's list. A vote for a candidate counts as a vote for
that candidate`s party. Like this ballot that PEI voters chose in their 2016
plebiscite. It links to FVC`s submission to the ERRE:
https://www.fairvote.ca/19/08/2016/fvc-erre-submissions_appx_12_-rural-urban_pr/
It explains “Rural-Urban PR uses single-member ridings as
may be deemed appropriate in rural and “small-urban” areas involving cities and
towns of less than 100,000 residents.” A table says 5-25% of the MPs would be
from single-member districts. Regional MPs (top up seats) could be
elected by best runners up (the best performing local candidates in the region
who did not get a local seat) or a second ballot with an open list could be
used.
Singles would not be Lethbridge (metro 123,847), so add Medicine Hat-Cardston-Warner. Nor Red Deer: city and CMA 100,844, so add Ponoka-Didsbury (note: Lacombe city 13,396, County 10,283).
