top of page
Tom Monto

WEXIT and PRO-REP

On the subject of western grievances - WEXIT,

Proportional representation, if it is proportional to votes cast - the usual interpretation, will do nothing to aid Westerners' lack of importance in Canadian federal elections. The West (if taken to be the area west of Ontario) has fewer votes than Ontario. The West if taken to be Alberta and Saskatchewan - the current fictitious Conservative nomenclature - has even fewer than that.


Ontario and Quebec do have the most voters and the most seats.  Our present system actually over-represents rural areas compared to cities, and over-represents less-populous provinces compared to most populous ones.


A strictly proportional system, based on votes, would give more seats to Toronto, Ontario and Quebec than even they are given at present.  A system where seats were allocated proportionally (equally and fairly) to each province would give six-tenths of the votes to the six provinces east of Manitoba and leave only four-tenths of the seats to the West. This would be no great help to Westerners. It would also be seen to create massive disparities and unequal votes-to-MP ratios. It would also be unconstitutional. If self-named "Westerners" are upset that not enough "Easterners" vote Conservative, maybe the government could pass a law saying that Easterners have to vote Conservative. No, that would not work either. I'm sure it is unconstitutional, for one thing. But some Easterners do vote Conservative -- they just do not win seats.  If only there was a system that allowed fair representation, where a certain percentage of the vote received about that same percentage of the seats.  Oh, yea - there is - proportional representation, the system discussed when I started on this topic.  Proportional representation would not give the West more seats, as I said, but it could allow Conservative voters in Ontario and Quebec to win the seats that they fairly deserve. Unfortunately if pro-rep was adopted in the East, it would also be adopted across the country and not just in the East.  If adopted in Alberta/Saskatchewan, it would allow Liberal voters in Alberta and Saskatchewan to win the 7 seats they were due in 2019, none of which they won. It would also allow the NDP to increase its seat count, from the one seat it won (with 235,000 votes overall) to about 7 as well. Perhaps even a Green candidate might win inland under a proportional system and not just on the two coasts. But out of fairness and equity, proportional representation should be adopted.  Pro-rep based on grouped districts, no district extending past a provincial boundary, would create in each province more mixed and fair representation. Thus, ensuring that a majority of voters in each district have representation ensuring that each substantial group in an area (a city, a county, etc.) would have its due measure of representation. ensuring that each major party in each province would have some representation (except maybe the smallest of provinces). reducing the waste of votes reducing the feeling of regionalism revealing basic truths of our political culture now hidden by or blamed on electoral inefficiencies.

A basic truth of our political culture now hidden by electoral inefficiencies is this: in 86 percent of the country (the area outside of Alberta /Saskatchewan - both east and west of AB/SK) there were a million more Liberal votes than Conservative votes. 

This is hidden in the vote results as usually tabulated.


But it is instructive as to how it would take a fundamentally undemocratic system, one even more fundamentally undemocratic than our present one, to give a Conservative party with that kind of support government of this country.


And if the WEST or any other part of the country is ignored by the parties competing for power, it is because the seats are either securely in the party's hands or securely in the other party's hands. Either way it is assumed usually correctly that the seats will not change so why bother campaigning there, or lobbying for votes there or doing more to serve the needs there?


This is why Alberta and Saskatchewan do not get much attention in election periods, They are already in most cases assured of being taken by Conservatives.


This explains the different election activities in swing states and "ignored states" in the U.S. The same can be seen in Canada where they are called unsafe seats and safe seats.


This phenomena, which leads to feeling of alienation, would be dampened by STV proportional representation where each district - or almost all - would have mixed representation, where quota in a district would be enough to win one seat, where 40 percent of the vote in a city would not be enough to win all the seats in a city.


Pro-rep at district level - STV - and perhaps other pro-rep systems creates small changes to party seat counts in response to small changes in voter sentiment (due sometimes to emergence of new parties), but does not create major changes from only minor changes (as FPTP does). 


Thus, STV in a city-wide multi-member district - or other forms of pro-rep - is both more stable and more responsive to changes in voter sentiment than FPTP in a collection of single-member districts dividing a city. 


This means that under STV every city, or other multi-member district, would have "swing" seats. Some more, some less. This would create more uniform campaign emphasis. (Each district would also have safe seats for different parties.)


 Other systems of pro-rep, such as party-list pro-rep or MMP, would also create uniform campaign emphasis in somewhat likewise fashion but perhaps at the provincial level.


Either way with pro-rep, no major party would be totally excluded from a province's group of MPs or MLAs (if space available). So no major party would be excluded from potential appointment to the cabinet where decisions are made.


Here's the choice:


FPTP PRO-REP

regionalism, WEXIT regionally more balanced representation

voters in all regions feeling listened to

feeling of rural-urban disparity voters everywhere fairly represented

waste of votes relatively few votes wasted

minority representation majority of votes means majority of seats

minority of votes means minority of seats

low voter turn-out higher voter turn-out.


Which do you choose?


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


What is STV?

From a 1902 reform magazine: "Thinking it well to have in every number something by way of a brief explanation of proportional voting, I repeat in this number the following. Proportional representation means the use of a reasonable and scientific system of voting instead of the present stupid, unfair and inefficient procedure. Methods: There are several systems by which the principle of proportional representation may be given effect to. Large electoral districts, each electing several members, are a necessary feature. The "quota" plan is usually employed. It means that a quota of the votes elects one representative. To arrive at the quota, the number of valid votes cast is divided by the number of seats to be filled. For instance in a seven-member district any one-seventh of the voters could elect one representative and the other six-sevenths could not interfere with their choice. The three principal systems of proportional representation are the Free List as used in Switzerland and Belgium [party-list pro-rep], the Hare system as used in Tasmania [STV], and the Gove System as advocated in Massachusetts. The Preferential Vote [Alternative Voting/Instant Run-off Voting] -- This is used in the election of single officers such as a mayor. It is not strictly a form of pro-rep but is akin thereto, and uses part of the same voting methods. The object of preferential voting is to encourage the free nomination of candidates and to obtain always a clear majority at one balloting, no matter how many candidates are nominated." (From the Proportional Representation Review Dec. 1902, p. 77) (Hathi Trust online resource, page 81/180) Thanks for reading. Check out my blog "list of Montopedia blogs concerning electoral reform" to find other blogs on this important subject. ----------------------------------- This year: *Alberta is celebrating 150 years in Confederation 1870-2020 *100th Anniversary of STV first being used to elect legislators in Canada Winnipeg MLAs first elected through STV in 1920 ==============================================================

2 views

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page