What are hopes for Conservative government under PR? Is that why Conservatives are leery of Proportional Representation?

It is sometimes asked why Conservative Party of Canada is not stridently asking for PR, so that it is sure to get its due share of seats.

But under PR, its chance to get majority government are not good, even if you add in seats that would be won by small right-wing parties, which receive about only 7 percent altogether at most.

Canada politics lately has been Liberals or Liberals-NDP arrayed against the Conservatives. Only one can have majority of votes, and under PR that majority would have majority of seats. And recent election party tallies show that the majority rests with Liberals or Lib-NDP.

IMO, these numbers show why.

Vote breakdown in federal elections cross-Canada (percentages)

Liberal Conservative NDP BQ Lib+NDP total

2004 37 30 16 12 53 (enough for majority)

2006 30 36 17 10 51 (enough for majority w/ Green)

2008 26 38 18 10 53 (enough for majority)

2011 19 40 31 6 50 (enough for majority)

2015 39 32 20 5 59 (enough for majority)

2019 33 34 16 8 56 (enough for majority  w/ Green))

2021 33 34 18 8 51 (enough for majority)

But as under PR, votes representation would be produced at the provincial /territorial level, not overall, there would be not quite accurate proportional represesentation.

Liberals are likely to take more than their due share of seats in the Territories and in PEI.

Liberals took all four PEI seats under FPTP and would likely take only two or three under province-wide district PR.

Libs and NDP took clean sweep of the Territories in 2021, where FPTP is likely the system that would have to be used even after reform to PR elsewhere.

Labrador would likely remain a single-member district, and it elected a Liberal in 2021 (with a minority of the vote (but with vast Lib-NDP majority, if that matters).

But in each of PEI, Territories and Labrador, Liberals and NDP vote together was a majority. So little hope for Conservatives advance under PR, except for taking one or two seats in PEI, instead of none.

Liberals are also likely to take more than its due proportion of the seats because having most votes or close to the most, they would benefit from the extra seats allotted to parties with effective votes when the parties with less than the threshold (if used and whatever it is set at) are barred from taking seats. Conservatives would also likely take more than their due share of seats but that increase would not be enough to get within range of majority of seats.

Conservative might see their best chance for majority government in FPTP

under FPTP, if the Conservative Party can get their support up to about 40 percent, they have at least some chance to amass a false-majority government, as it actually did in 2011.

So I suggest making PR appealing to Conservative party by emphasizing its "regional" fairness.

By winning their fair share of seats in each province, Conservatives would have at least one elected in each province, and therefore each province could have representation in any cabinet, instead of how under FPTP one party or another takes a clean sweep of all of a province's seats, leaving the province out of a cabinet formed by the other party.

under PR, Conservative MPs would be elected in greater numbers in cities esp. Toronto.

under PR, Conservatives would be guaranteed to get their due share of seats, instead of being beat down to just a runt when they get the short end of the stick when FPPF goes against them, such as might happen in this election.

In 2000, they got only 12 seats when their 12 percent of the vote should have given them about 40 seats. This election saw a strong showing by the Alliance which no longer exists so I did not put it in the chart above, which stakes out political culture at least roughly equivalent to what we see today.

When Liberals have minority government, at least when Justin led Liberals, it was fairly natural to form inter-party co-operation between Liberals and NDP.

And forming inter-party co-operation between Conservatives and NDP woud not be easy as their economic viewpoints are so different.

the Conservatives are even more right-wing (anti-worker, anti-personal rights) than historically was the case.

and that shows in their foreign policy - Conservatives are much conciliatory toward the U.S., to say the least,

while NDP know that Canada's future will either be through "the State" (active involvement in the economy by the government) or "The States" (engulfment by the U.S.).

in AB Premier Smith's viewpoint, what is good for exports to the U.S. is good for business, and Canadian nationalism be damned. At least that is how I hear her. And that viewpoint is reflected by the Conservative party federally.

While being pro-worker, as NDP is, means keeping Canada as clear of U.S. dominance as possible. and also hopes for diversified and economically stable economy also depends on breaking from the "hewer of wood, drawer of water"-for-the-U.S. model for our future economic development.

What that means for the Canadian car industry is unclear - do we have enough general demand to support a car industry?

to the good side, Canada has never at as many residents as now.

There was a Volvo plant in Canada in old days - I dont know what happened to force its closure, but that was too bad.

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