Fair Vote Canada (Colour code: Liberal–red, Conservative-dark blue, Bloq–light blue, NDP–orange, Green–green, PPC–purple.)
So, one more federal election, one more failure to get the results we voted for, one more missed opportunity to change our archaic and unfair electoral system.
You may remember the last real opportunity.
It was 2015, and the Liberals were in deep electoral doo doo. The party’s already shaky support in public opinion polls was cratering, thanks in part to their opposition to the Conservative government’s anti-terrorism bill.
贾斯汀·特鲁多（Justin Trudeau）似乎注定要加入Stephane Dion和Michael Ignatieff之类的人，成为常年总理史蒂芬·哈珀（Stephen Harper）的最新自由主义者，成为加拿大政治历史上又是另一项一级自由主义者星号。
But suddenly, out of nowhere, our then prime-ministerial-wannabe (who is now our third-term prime minister), pulled a Willy Wonka Golden Ticket out of his back pocket.
His magic words? “2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.”
Justin Trudeau declared it thus. And declared it. Over and over. According to the opposition, he said it at least 1,800 times in the leadup to the Oct. 19, 2015, vote.
Electoral reform became a concrete pillar in that year’s Liberal election platform.
有效。难怪。
加拿大人显然正在寻找那一年更大的新事物和不同的东西。尽管自由主义者并不是唯一在2015年促进选举改革的政党 -“63 per cent of voters cast ballots for parties that said they would make every vote count”notedPolicy Optionsin 2017 — Trudeau’s promise captured the popular imagination. As Trudeau himself noted in a slightly different context: “Because it’s 2015.”
The idea wasn’t even all that new. There had already been more than a dozen “previous studies and consultations that all recommended adding proportionality to the voting system.”
Globally, proportional representation reality was far from radical. More than 80% of countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development — a collection of close to 40 wealthy countries who all describe themselves as democracies — already had some form of proportional representation.
Canada?
Using Canada’s skewed political math, 39% of voter support often equaled more than 50% of seats in the House of Commons. In the 70 years since World War II, in fact, there had been 16 “majority” governments in Canada, only four of which had earned more than 50% support among voters.
In 2015, of course, Trudeau’s Liberals themselves would go on to win just 39.5% of the popular vote but 54% of seats. As Kelly Carmichael, the then-executive director of Fair Vote Canada, put it starkly inPolicy Optionsin 2017，，，，“只有460万加拿大人（来自3600万人口中的1,740万选民）投票赞成目前拥有权力的184名自由主义者。”
然而……在蛇油自由改革的承诺中有砂纸摩擦。
The Liberals won that year — as Liberals often do — precisely因为we have a first-past-the-post electoral system.
Which led — as it so often does with eyes-always-on-the-prize Liberals — to a post-election, post-haste Liberal retreat.
自由主义者确实任命了一个选举改革的屁股覆盖全党特别委员会。它在全国各地的每个省和领土上花费了60万美元举行听证会，在委员会会议上占据了217小时compiled a 333-page report“recommending major changes to the country’s voting system,” including a national referendum on switching to some form of proportional representation. Some percentages worth noting from that process:
- 80% of citizens who attended committee-organized town halls asked for proportional representation;
- 88% of experts who made submissions to the committee (and indicated a system preference) recommended proportional representation;
- The committee’s own survey found 71.5% of Canadians wanted a system that “respected voter intention where the proportion of overall votes match the percentage of seats in the House of Commons.”
特鲁多政府的回应？该报告“在释放后数小时内被特鲁多政府拒绝了。”希尔时报。
Trudeau claimed there was no consensus — see above — and therefore he wouldn’t go forward with any sort of electoral reform at all.
他没有。在我们最近的选举活动（自他最初的诺言以来的第二个）中，特鲁多坚持为了照相目的，他仍然愿意摆脱第一盘的系统，但这不再是优先事项是“没有共识”。
“If ever there is more of a consensus,” he declared two days before Canadians went to the polls, “it could be interesting to follow up on, and I’d be open to that.”
How open? Consider the results of the 2021 election. This time the Liberals actually lost even the popular vote. They got 33% compared to the Tories’ 34% but will get to form the government because they spread their vote more “efficiently” over the country’s 338 ridings. The Tories racked up huge majorities in a limited number of western ridings, winning just 119 seats, while the Liberals managed to snaggle just enough votes to win in more different ridings, winning 158 seats.
How likely do you think it will be that the Liberals bring in electoral reform in this term? Your first two guesses don’t count.
对其他政党的支持就像偏斜一样，但以不同的方式。新民主党赢得了17.7％的选票，但最终只有7.4％的席位。绿党获得了2.3％的选票，但仅占席位的0.6％。另一方面，马克西姆·伯尼尔（Maxime Bernier）的右翼人民党赢得了5.1％的选票，但根本没有席位。
等一下！如果有简单的比例表示，则意味着右翼，反VAXX的边缘PPC最终可能会有20个座位！谁想要那个？
不是我，但我宁愿在下议院内有那些边缘的观点，而不是在街道上，他们的边缘挫败感可能不受限制。
此外,加拿大公平投票,公关的游说团体oportional representation in Canada, points out, simple proportional representation in Canada — a geographically huge country with many regional interests — would not be the most likely-to-be adopted system to accurately reflect the country’s political views.
Instead,Fair Vote Canada’s experts prepared two simulationsof the 2021 election outcome based on the most commonly recommended proportional representation systems for Canada: single transferable vote (STV), or mixed-member proportional (MMP).
The short explanations:
- 单一可转让投票：several local ridings are merged, and voters collectively elect several MPs using a ranked ballot (allowing them to mark candidates 1, 2, 3 etc. in order of preference).
- 成比例的混合成员:选民选举当地议员在一个更大的骑using first-past-the-post and one or more MPs that serve the entire region. The regional MPs, selected by voters from an open list, compensate for the distortions of the first-past-the-post results and ensure that the overall seat totals for each party more closely reflect their share of the popular vote.
The envelopes please:
Fair Vote Canada
And成比例的混合成员:
Fair Vote Canada
In the second scenario, the Liberals would still win narrowly. In the first, the Tories would win, also narrowly. In either case, they would need the support — as the Liberals do now — of some combination of smaller parties to effectively govern.
最大的区别 - 很大 - 是所有政党在议会中的席位将更紧密地反映我们对他们的支持。
In a democracy, can that be a bad thing?
Subscribe to the Halifax Examiner
我们还有许多其他可用的订阅选项，，，，or drop usa donation。Thanks!
All of which ignores the fact that PEI has 4 MPs in a House of Commons with 338 members. Based on population PEI should have just 1.4 members of parliament. The argument also fails on the grounds of not knowing why people choose to vote the way they do and that voters would have no say in who represents them. Messing with the electoral system may be acceptable if voters were allowed to vote on a budget or other important issues. Perhaps we should have a greater focus on how municipal government works and how to make it more responsive to residents.
We have seen this type of analysis from Fair Vote Canada time and time again.
It is based on a core assumption that, when I vote, I am voting for a political party represented by this candidate. What if this assumption is wrong, at least for some Canadians, and maybe for an increasing proportion of Canadians?
Perhaps Canadians want to vote for individuals who have skills, knowledge, and experience, relevant to being a parliamentarian. Many municipal and territorial elections use this idea. Perhaps Canadians want to vote on policies related to specific issues, and a balance that is not reflected by any political party (for example: strong climate change actions, targeted social programs, and a balanced budget).
I believe it is time to think “out of the box”, and stop assuming that political parties are the right answer.
Fair Vote Canada have proposed a citizens assembly on electoral reform. That is a good idea, if the process remains wide open to many different options and assumptions.
“…a core assumption that, when I vote, I am voting for a political party represented by this candidate…”
在我的经验中，主要是这样。
All the focus groups, the opinion polling, the slick, expensive advertising and the cute TV debate one-liners lead to that outcome. It’s all about The Leader.
Sure there are some folks who actually know their local party candidate and would vote for them no matter what party they stood for but they are an increasing minority IMHO. Party electoral district associations look for just such trusted, saleable people to package and market under theparty brand。我们将他们送往众议院有信心，他们将代表选民的价值观和优先事项，只是发现他们返回为加盟商and sales reps of The Party which demands they vote as directed by The Leader and speak only “talking points” supplied by Head Office.
Their prime jobs are to both form a human tally that decides which party governs and to represent The Party to us first before representing us to The House, although it’s that latter role that pays their salaries and generous pensions. They have become electoral proxies for The Party, whose public face is The Leader. Come election time, most voters will elect their preferred party leader through these proxies – who will be unfamiliar names for most. I recall a story about an Ontario voter some years back feeling confused because he came to vote for Stephen Harper but couldn’t find his name on the ballot.
It’s not just our parliaments that are controlled by self-serving political parties. They also dominate our electoral politics to the point that it’s virtually impossible for independents to compete against the finances and volunteers of party machines.
A Fair Vote Canada citizen’s assembly will begin from the assumption that electoral reform must be some flavour ofproportional representation.
Look how well that has worked for Israel over the last few years, finally returning a fragile coalition government that includes small extremist parties advocating policies that at times sound close to genocide. Look how well it worked for Italy since World War Two.
Right now Germany is going through a PR election that will eventually return anothergrand coalition。This is where the centre right CDU/CSU and the centre left SPD, unable to govern in their own right and unable to form a coalition they can control, end up forming a coalition with each other and smaller parties. The result is that in order to hold the coalition together no strongly progressive nor strongly conservative bills get passed. Once again, the interests of the parties will be put above those of the nation.
在我看来，要求FPTP投票给当地候选人的投票制度，而另一个候选人的投票制度进一步赋予了我们民主中政党的权力。在这些日子里，超级党派的疯狂，这是我们需要的最后一件事。相反，我相信我们应该寻找reduce党派在选举出来的代表s and over elections, not increase it further. Some flavours of proportional representation “top up” the seats they actually won to become a proportion to which they feel entitled by appointing un-elected party people into The House tosit alongside elected Members.
No thanks. I believe every Member should only be in The House because they wereelectedby amajorityof their constituents.
I believe we need a ballot system that puts more power in the hands ofvoters, not parties.One that is unlikely to return unstable or unexpectedly extremist governments. One where the simple act of filling out a ballot represents strategic voting by default. One where nobody can win a riding with less 50% voter support.
I believe Canada needs a Ranked Ballot.
Elected politicians should not be the only, or even primary, deciders on whether or not to optimize the system for how they get their jobs, nor what that system should be. As another poster mentioned, the net should be cast widely for the most optimal system. Surely in a world that is changing exponentially we need to evolve. This would apply to our entire democratic practice, not just the process of voting.
I totally agree!