2026 Liberal Conference will vote on a Proportional Representation Resolution and on an Instant-Runoff Voting Resolution.

2026 Liberal Conference, Montreal, April 9-11

Proportional Representation Resolution

Electoral Reform — Move to a Proportional Representation System

Sponsor Group: National Women’s Liberal Commission

WHEREAS; Canada’s First Past the Post (FPTP) system awards each riding to the top vote-getter, creating “winner-take-all” outcomes that distort representation, heighten regional divisions, and discourage voter participation among under-represented groups;

WHEREAS; a Proportional Representation (PR) system would more accurately translate votes into seats, reflect political diversity across provinces and territories, and promote collaboration and coalition-building that encourages women and minority candidates;

WHEREAS; PR can reduce abrupt policy reversals after elections, foster long-term planning, and minimize waste from changing programs;

WHEREAS; over 130 countries use proportional or mixed electoral systems, including stable democracies such as Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Ireland (Electoral Reform Society, 2025); [1]

WHEREAS; Citizens’ Assemblies—citizen-led, inclusive, and deliberative processes—have proven effective in addressing complex constitutional questions and building public legitimacy, as demonstrated in Ireland;

WHEREAS; modernizing Canada’s electoral system through Proportional Representation will strengthen democracy, reduce polarization, and ensure every vote counts equally.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to:

• Establish a Citizens’ Assembly (or comparable independent, cross-regional body) to design and recommend the most suitable form of Proportional Representation for Canada, with expert input and regional balance.

  
  

• Provide comprehensive public education on Proportional Representation, including its benefits, challenges, and international evidence.

  
  

• Secure a multi-party commitment to implement the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendation before the next federal election, ensuring a fair, transparent, and representative transition.

  =======

  
  

Instant-Runoff Voting Resolution

In contrast to that well-written resolution, another to be voted on at the Conference (held April 9-11) is in favour of Instant-Runoff Voting  (boo hiss).

WHEREAS PM Justin Trudeau promised to replace first past the post election system as a 2015 election promise. An all‑party committee was formed, and three options were discussed:

1. Hold public forums to discuss options (CPC)

2. Ranked ballot (LPC)

3. Proportional representation (Green Party & NDP)

As no consensus was reached, electoral reform was dropped.

WHEREAS the current system can result in a candidate winning with less than a majority of votes.

WHEREAS requiring a candidate to receive at least 50% plus one vote would ensure the winner has stronger democratic legitimacy.

WHEREAS voter turnout may increase when electors can rank candidates, allowing them to vote their true preference without fear of vote‑splitting.

WHEREAS ranked ballots and run‑off systems can encourage more civil campaigns, as candidates may rely on second‑choice support.

WHEREAS the proposal reduces the number of wasted or “dead” votes, especially in ridings where one party consistently wins.

WHEREAS ranked ballots reduce the need for multiple elections, with recounts becoming less likely.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to:

-adopt a voting system requiring candidates to receive 50% plus one vote to be elected.

This may be achieved through a ranked ballot system or, alternatively, a run‑off election. [no system that allows voters discretion on how many back-up preferences he or she marks can do that and neither does runoff elections so obviously they just mean 50 percent plus 1 of votes as counted at that point in the count process.]

If a candidate receives less than 50% on the first preference count, they would be subject to recall or a subsequent vote within one year.

[so even if elected after transfers or in second round of voting, they would still be up for a by-election within a year. Laughable]

IMPORTANT NOTE (From FVC):  

Subjecting candidates who received less than 50% of the vote to recall or a new election would mean an endless stream of by-elections. For example, 45 of the currently elected Liberal MPs would face a by-election within a year. 

[not to mention the many elected MPs of other parties who also were elected with less than half the votes in their ridings. and even if elected in the by-election many of them would be up for by-election again, a year later.]

===============================================

Important fact checking was conducted in a FVC press release regarding this resolution:

50 Plus 1 Electoral Reform - FACT CHECKED

WHEREAS PM Justin Trudeau promised to replace first past the post election system as a 2015 election promise. An all‑party committee was formed, and three options were discussed:

1. Hold public forums to discuss options (CPC)

2. Ranked ballot (LPC)

FACT CHECK: The Liberal Party members on the electoral reform committee (ERRE) did not advocate for winner-take-all ranked ballots. The committee heard from over 100 experts and conducted public hearings across the country.

At the press conference when the committee’s final report was released, the Chair stated that they found: “Nobody wants a ranked ballot.”

The supplementary report by the Liberal members of the ERRE did not advocate for winner-take-all ranked ballots either, but for more deliberative consultations before any change was made. The report stated: “We believe that, in order to reform the electoral system and get it right, we need to ensure inclusive and deliberative discussion with Canadians.” It was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who would only accept a winner-take-all ranked ballot, and who made his position clear after he broke the promise.

3. Proportional representation (Green Party & NDP)

As no consensus was reached, electoral reform was dropped.

FACT CHECK: While it’s true the parties did not come to a consensus, the consensus among experts (88%) was overwhelmingly in favour of proportional representation. 

WHEREAS the current system can result in a candidate winning with less than a majority of votes.

NOTE: This is true - at the riding level, with individual candidates. At the level of Parliament, however, it’s worth noting that all winner-take-all systems mean that a majority government can be formed with less than a majority of voter support. Winner-take-all ranked ballots can make the overall results in Parliament more disproportional. 

2026 Liberal Conference

WHEREAS requiring a candidate to receive at least 50% plus one vote would ensure the winner has stronger democratic legitimacy.WHEREAS voter turnout may increase when electors can rank candidates, allowing them to vote their true preference without fear of vote‑splitting.

FACT CHECK: Voter Turnout: There’s no evidence that ranking candidates in a winner-take-all system increases voter turnout in national elections. When winner-take-all ranked ballots were used for thirty years to elect provincial MLAs in rural ridings in Alberta and Manitoba, there was no increase in voter turnout. The only OECD country to use winner-take-all ranked ballots for national elections (Australia) also has compulsory voting. By contrast, there is an abundance of evidence counties with proportional representation have higher voter turnout. Voters using their choices: When winner-take-all ranked ballots were used for thirty years to elect provincial MLAs in rural ridings in Alberta and Manitoba, most people did not even bother to rank a second choice. This is logical, considering that with a winner-take-all ranked ballot, most preferences are never even counted, and the outcome rarely differs from first-past-the-post. By contrast, in Ireland, which uses proportional representation with ranked ballots to ensure voter rankings really count, almost all voters rank multiple candidates.

WHEREAS ranked ballots and run‑off systems can encourage more civil campaigns, as candidates may rely on second‑choice support.

FACT CHECK: While increased civility makes some sense in a municipal context without parties, there is no evidence this is true in national elections with parties using winner-take-all ranked ballots. A 2026 study found that winner-take-all ranked ballots do not necessarily encourage candidates to reach out for second choice support with policies that appeal to a broader base. In fact, this system can incentivize candidates to do the opposite – to campaign even more to a narrow base, especially in elections with high partisanship.In terms of the tone of politics, research shows that politics in Australia, under winner-take-all ranked ballot, is more polarized than Canada is with first-past-the-post. 

WHEREAS the proposal reduces the number of wasted or “dead” votes, especially in ridings where one party consistently wins.

FACT CHECK: In most ridings where one party consistently wins - safe seats - the MP already receives more than 50% of the vote and second choices preferences aren’t even counted. The same number of voters cast wasted votes. Winner-take-all ranked ballots only make a difference in a handful of swing ridings, where a small number of voters may see their ballots count towards the result. 

WHEREAS ranked ballots reduce the need for multiple elections, with recounts becoming less likely.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to:

adopt a voting system requiring candidates to receive 50% plus one vote to be elected. This may be achieved through a ranked ballot system or, alternatively, a run‑off election.

If a candidate receives less than 50% on the first preference count, they would be subject to recall or a subsequent vote within one year.

========================