DOCSLIB.ORG

Electoral Reform:Layout 1.Qxd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Electoral Reform:Layout 1.Qxd WWW.IPPR.ORG DevisinganElectoral Systemforthe21st Century: ThecaseforAMS DrPhilMcCarvill May2010 ©ippr2010 InstituteforPublicPolicyResearch Challengingideas– Changingpolicy 2 ippr|DevisinganElectoralSystemforthe21stCentury:ThecaseforAMS Aboutippr TheInstituteforPublicPolicyResearch(ippr)istheUK’sleadingprogressivethinktank, producingcutting-edgeresearchandinnovativepolicyideasforajust,democraticand sustainableworld. Since1988,wehavebeenattheforefrontofprogressivedebateandpolicymakinginthe UK.Throughourindependentresearchandanalysiswedefinenewagendasforchangeand providepracticalsolutionstochallengesacrossthefullrangeofpublicpolicyissues. WithofficesinbothLondonandNewcastle,weensureouroutlookisasbroad-basedas possible,whileourGlobalChangeprogrammeextendsourpartnershipsandinfluence beyondtheUK,givingusatrulyworld-classreputationforhighqualityresearch. ippr,30-32SouthamptonStreet,LondonWC2E7RA.Tel:+44(0)2074706100E:[email protected] www.ippr.org.RegisteredCharityNo.800065 ThispaperwasfirstpublishedinMay2010.©ippr2010 3 ippr|DevisinganElectoralSystemforthe21stCentury:ThecaseforAMS Introduction The2010generalelectionresulthasputelectoralreformcentrestageanddealtapotentially terminalblowtotheFirstPastthePost(FPTP)system.Thisisnotsimplyduetoa perpetuationofage-olddistortionswhichinvariablyrewardLabourandtheConservatives andpenalisetheLiberalDemocrats:itisalsobecauseFPTPhasnotdeliveredadecisive electionresult.TheFPTPhasultimatelybeenundonebyoneofitsownproudestboasts.A hungparliamenthasforcedthethreemainpartiesintoprotractednegotiations–resultingin aConservative/LiberalDemocratcoalitionandthepromiseofareferendumonthe AlternativeVote(AV)system. Generallyindiscussionsaboutchangestothevotingsystemithasbeenassumedthechoice isbetweenthreeoptions:AV,AlternativeVotePlus(AV+)ortheSingleTransferableVote (STV).However,thispaperarguesthatitistheAdditionalMemberSystem(AMS)whichis mostsuitedtotheUKcontext.AMScombinesthebestelementsofthecurrentsystemwith arightfulfocusonproportionality,representationandfairness. AMSisalreadyusedtoelecttheScottishParliament,theWelshAssemblyandtheGreater LondonAssemblyandhasbeenshowntoworkintheUKcontext.Internationally,in countrieslikeGermanyandNewZealand,ithasdemonstratedthecapacitytodeliverboth resultswhichreflecttheelectorate’svotingintentionandstablegovernance. MostimportantlyintheUKcontext,AMSisaproportionalsystemwhichretainsthe constituencylink–animportant,evencherished,partofourpoliticaltradition.AMS thereforeensuresbothcontinuityandanopportunitytoembraceasystemwhichmore closelyreflectstheregionalandnationalpatternsofelectoralsupport. InarguingthecaseforAMSwetakeourleadfromanumberofdistinguishedacademicsand experts,andinparticularfromLordAlexanderofWeedon,thesoledissentingvoiceonthe JenkinsCommissionwhoarguedthatAMSrepresentedthemostappropriateelectoral systemfortheUK(JenkinsCommission1998). Structureofthepaper ThepaperbeginswithanassessmentofthefailingsofthecurrentFPTPsystemandthecore argumentsforgenuineelectoralreform.Itthenestablishesanumberofcriteriawhichany newelectoralsystemmustsatisfy.Thereisthenananalysisofthevariousalternative electoralsystems.HavingconcludedthatAMSrepresentsthemostappropriateelectoral systemfortheUK,thereportexplainswhyAMSwouldbegoodforUKpoliticallifeina widersense. 4 ippr|DevisinganElectoralSystemforthe21stCentury:ThecaseforAMS TheFirstPastthePostsystem TheelectionresulthasdeliveredyetfurtherevidenceoftheinadequacyoftheFirstPastthe Postsystem.AsTable1demonstrates,therecontinuetobehugedisparitiesbetweenthe numberofvotespolledandtheproportionofparliamentaryseatssecured. Table1:GeneralElection2010:voteshareandseatnumbers Party Shareofvote Numberofseats Conservative 36.1% 306 Labour 29% 258 LiberalDemocrat 23% 57 Other 11.9% 28 Source:BBCWebsite-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/ PerhapsmosttellingforFPTP,theshareofthevoteforthetwomajorpartiescontinuesto fall(DunleavyandMargetts2005).In2010,thecombinedConservativeandLabourvote wasjust65.1percent,downfrom67.6percentin2005.Bycomparison,thecombined shareofthevoteinthe1950GeneralElectionwas89.5percent(BBCwebsite,1997).Over thelast60years,thedominanceofthetwomainpartieshaswanedsignificantly,butwestill haveanelectoralsystemwhichreflectsabygoneera. OneofthemaindistortingfeaturesofFPTPisthatitleadstoadisproportionatefocusona smallanddecliningnumberofmarginalseats.Hugesumsofmoneyandresourcesare pouredintothefewconstituenciesthatmaydictatethefinaloutcome.Earlycalculations fromthiselectionsuggestthat89seatsweredecidedbylessthan5percentofthevoteand 40ofthosebylessthan1000votes.Theothersideofthisequationisthatthevotesof millionsofpeoplearecastinconstituencieswherethereislittleornochanceofremoving theincumbent,therebylockingalargepercentageoftheelectorateoutofanysensethat theyhavethepowertochoosethenextgovernment. Noneofthisisinanywayrevelatory;analystssuchasDunleavyandMargettshavelong notedthattheUK’selectoralsystemhasbeencreakingforsometime.Byalmostany measure,theUKhasbeenexperiencinganacutedemocraticdeficitforanumberofdecades. In2005,theproportionofvoterswhoseintentionswereeffectivelyignoredbythevoting systemstoodat31percentandtherewereregionsoftheUKinwhichmeasuresof deviationfromproportionalityreached86percent(DunleavyandMargetts2005).Dunleavy andMargettshavecalculatedthatin2005,41percentofMPshadnorighttoholdtheir seatsonthebasisoftheirparty’sshareofthevote(ibid). DuringtimesinwhichFPTPregularlydelivereddecisivemajoritygovernment,itwasperhaps forgivabletooverlooktheinherentinequalitiesofthatsystem.Nowtherecanbenosuch justification.FPTPhasdeliveredahungparliamentthathasledtoprotractednegotiationsto formapowersharinggovernmentwithelectoralreformcentraltothosenegotiations.The issuecannotbeshelvedagain,evenifthenewgovernmentprovestobeastableone.So whatformofvotingsystemisbestfortheUK? 5 ippr|DevisinganElectoralSystemforthe21stCentury:ThecaseforAMS Electoralreform–theessentialcriteria Inordertoensurethatweemergewithelectoralreformthatdeliversanequitable, representativeandproportionalsystemthatproducesstablegovernments,wesuggestthat reformmustsatisfyanumberofclearcriteria. Firstly,itmustmaintaintheconstituencylink viawhichMembersofParliamenthavean attachmenttoalocalityandareperceivedtorepresentandservetheinterestsoftheir constituents.TheconstituencylinksitsattheheartofrepresentativedemocracyintheUK:it ensuresadirectlineofaccountabilitybetweenvotersandtheirMP,andgroundsMPsina geographicalrealityoutsidetheWestminsterbubble.ThisisnottosuggestthatallMPsmust betiedtoconstituenciesorthatthecurrentnumberofconstituenciesmustremainfixed. Thesewillbemattersfordiscussion. ThereisaproudtraditionofconstituencyMPsrepresentingallconstituentsandnotsimply thosewhovotedforthem,aprincipleworthpreserving.Earlyanalysisofconstituencyresults fromthe2010generalelectionhasrevealedanumberofexamplesofsittingMPsdefying strongnationalandregionalswings,oftenwithincreasedmajorities.Inanumberof instancesthemostobviousexplanationisthepresenceofapopularsittingMPwhohas workedhardtobuildsupportlocally. Secondly,thesystemmustestablishaclearerrelationshipbetweenthenumberof votescastforaparticularpartyandthenumberofseatsitsecures.Thiswillhelp ensurethatprinciplesofrepresentationandproportionareembeddedinareformedelectoral system. Areformedsystemmustavoidreplicatingorreinforcingthedistortionofthecurrentsystem orsimplyfavouringthelargestparties. Thirdly,weneedasystemwhichensuresthatallvoteshaveavalue andthatthereal electoralbattleisnotconfinedtoasmallnumberofmarginalconstituencies. Finally,theelectoralsystemmustbesufficientlysophisticatedtoprovidefor stablebutnot glacialgovernment.Althoughanyproportionalsystemislikelytoproducecoalition government,itmustallowvoterstobringaboutperiodicshiftsinpowerwhicharedecisive andreflectthechangingnationalmood. Thechoice Afteryearsinthedoldrums,electoralreformemergedasarealisticprospectintheaftermath oftheexpensesscandalin2009.Suchwasthescaleofthepoliticalcrisisthatallareasof reformwerebeingseriouslydiscussed.Then,justpriortotheelectioncampaign,Gordon BrownannouncedinaspeechtoipprthatifLabourwasre-electeditwouldholda referendumontheAlternativeVote(Brown2010).Whilecondemnedinsomequartersasa ‘deathbedconversion’whichwasonlymadetowooLiberalDemocratsupporterstothe flaggingLabourcause,itwasamajorchangeinLabourpolicy.Theprospectofelectoral reformthenhadanotherboostwhenNickClegg’sstrongshowingsintheearlyTVdebates ledtoasurgeinLiberalDemocratpollratings.Thoseratingswerenottranslatedintohard votesattheballotbox,buttheactualresultmeanttheLiberalDemocratswerecentralto post-electionnegotiations. Wehaveofcoursebeenherebefore,mostrecentlyin1997,whenthefirstBlairgovernment establishedtheJenkinsCommissiontoexaminetheoptionsforelectoralreform.Reportinga yearlater,theCommission’sauthoritativereportclearlystatedthecaseforelectoralreform andrecommendedAlternativeVotePlus(AV+)asitspreferredvotingsystem.AV+combines thealternativevotesystemfortheelectionofconstituencymembersandatop-upof 6 ippr|DevisinganElectoralSystemforthe21stCentury:ThecaseforAMS additionalseats,allocatedtopartiesaccordingtotheirshareofthevote–thelatterelement beingachievedthroughtheuseofanopenorclosedpartylist.InsettinguptheCommission theBlairgovernmentwasdeliveringonamanifestocommitmenttolookatelectoralreform. Buthavingwonahugelandslidevictoryundertheoldsystemitisperhapsnotsurprising thattheGovernmentconsignedtheJenkinsReporttothepoliticalshelf,largelydueto internaloppositionatseniorlevelswithintheLabourParty. ipprwasamongthosevoiceswhichconsistentlylamentedthismissedopportunityand continuedtoargueforaproportionalsystem.TwelveyearsonfromJenkins,wearguethatis vitalthatanotherchanceisnotallowedtoslipaway.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unit 7 Electoral Systems and Electoral Processes
    Electoral Systems and Electoral UNIT 7 ELECTORAL SYSTEMS AND Processes ELECTORAL PROCESSES Structure 7.0 Objectives 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Classification of electoral systems 7.3 Majoritarian Systems 7.3.1 First-Past-the-Post/ Single-Member Plurality system 7.3.2 Second Ballot System 7.3.3 Alternative Vote (AV)/ Supplementary Vote (SV) system 7.3.4 Condorcet Method 7.4 Proportional Representation Systems 7.4.1 Single-Transferable-Vote (STV) System 7.4.2 Party-List System 7.5 Mixed Methods 7.5.1 Mixed-Member Proportional or Additional Member System 7.5.2 Semi-Proportional Method 7.5.3 Cumulative Vote System 7.5.4 Slate System 7.6 Comparative Assessment of Majoritarian and PR Systems 7.7 Let Us Sum Up 7.8 References 7.9 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises Dr. Tulika Gaur, Guest Faculty, Non-Collegiate Women's Education Board, University of Delhi, Delhi 97 Representation and Political 7.0 OBJECTIVES Participation An electoral system does not only set rules for election, but also plays crucial role in shaping the party system and political culture of the country. This unit focuses on electoral systems and processes. After going through this unit, you should be able to: Define electoral system, Identify the various dimensions of an electoral system, Assess combinations of electoral methods used by different countries in their national or local elections, Examine the advantages and disadvantages of different kinds of electoral systems, and Analyse the links between parties and electoral process. 7.1 INTRODUCTION The electoral system refers to a set of rules through which people get to choose their representatives or political leaders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of UK Electoral Systems
    Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts The impact of UK electoral systems Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Dunleavy, Patrick and Margetts, Helen (2005) The impact of UK electoral systems. Parliamentary affairs, 58 (4). pp. 854-870. DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsi068 © 2005 Oxford University Press This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/3083/ Available in LSE Research Online: February 2008 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final manuscript accepted version of the journal article, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer review process. Some differences between this version and the published version may remain. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. Forthcoming in Parliamentary Affairs, September 2005 THE IMPACT OF THE UK’S ELECTORAL SYSTEMS* Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts In the immediate aftermath of the general election the Independent ran a whole-page headline illustrated with contrasting graphics showing ‘What we voted for’ and ‘What we got’, followed up by ‘…and why it’s time for change’.1 The paper launched a petition calling for a shift to a system that is fairer and more proportional, which in rapid time attracted tens of thousands of signatories, initially at a rate of more than 500 people a day.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections REFORM September 2015
    TOPIC EXPLORATION PACK GCSE Theme: Elections REFORM September 2015 GCSE (9–1) Citizenship Studies Oxford Cambridge and RSA We will inform centres about any changes to the specification. We will also publish changes on our website. The latest version of our specification will always be the one on our website (www.ocr.org.uk) and this may differ from printed versions. Copyright © 2015 OCR. All rights reserved. Copyright OCR retains the copyright on all its publications, including the specifications. However, registered centres for OCR are permitted to copy material from this specification booklet for their own internal use. Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations is a Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England. Registered company number 3484466. Registered office: 1 Hills Road Cambridge CB1 2EU OCR is an exempt charity. This resource is an exemplar of the types of materials that will be provided to assist in the teaching of the new qualifications being developed for first teaching in 2016. It can be used to teach existing qualifications but may be updated in the future to reflect changes in the new qualifications. Please check the OCR website for updates and additional resources being released. We would welcome your feedback so please get in touch. Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Activity 1 ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons on Voting Reform from Britian's First Pr Elections
    WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW: LESSONS ON VOTING REFORM FROM BRITIAN'S FIRST PR ELECTIONS by Philip Cowley, University of Hull John Curtice, Strathclyde UniversityICREST Stephen Lochore, University of Hull Ben Seyd, The Constitution Unit April 2001 WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW: LESSONS ON VOTING REFORM FROM BRITIAN'S FIRST PR ELECTIONS Published by The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy UCL (University College London) 29/30 Tavistock Square London WClH 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ 0 The Constitution Unit. UCL 200 1 This report is sold subject ot the condition that is shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First published April 2001 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ..................................................................................4 Voters' attitudes to the new electoral systems ...........................................................4 Voters' behaviour under new electoral systems ......................................................... 4 Once elected .... The effect of PR on the Scottish Parliament in Practice ..................5 Voter Attitudes to the New Electoral Systems ............................................6
    [Show full text]
  • GUIDELINES to ASSIST NATIONAL MINORITY PARTICIPATION in the ELECTORAL PROCESS Guidelines for Electoral Process.Qxd 03-05-06 11:39 Page 1
    Cover Minority #1 08.09.2003 14:22 Uhr Seite 1 GUIDELINES TO ASSIST NATIONAL MINORITY PARTICIPATION IN THE ELECTORAL PROCESS Guidelines_for_Electoral_Process.qxd 03-05-06 11:39 Page 1 GUIDELINES TO ASSIST NATIONAL MINORITY PARTICIPATION IN THE ELECTORAL PROCESS Guidelines_for_Electoral_Process.qxd 03-05-06 11:39 Page 2 Published by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Aleje Ujazdowskie 19 00-557 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr © OSCE/ODIHR 2001 Reprint 2003 All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such reproduction be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the OSCE/ODIHR as the source. Guidelines_for_Electoral_Process.qxd 03-05-06 11:39 Page 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION . 5 2. BACKGROUND TO THE LUND RECOMMENDATIONS . 7 3. THE IMPORTANCE OF PROCESS . 9 4. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK . 11 5. LUND RECOMMENDATION ON ELECTIONS: NO. 7 . 15 5.1 Content Explanation . 15 5.1.1 The individual rights to participate in elections . 16 5.1.2 The prohibition against discrimination . 20 5.2 Legal Framework and Options . 22 6. LUND RECOMMENDATION ON ELECTIONS: NO. 8 . 24 6.1 Content Explanation . 24 6.2 Legislative Framework . 27 7. LUND RECOMMENDATION ON ELECTIONS: NO. 9 . 28 7.1 Content Explanation . 28 7.2 Legislative Framework and Options . 31 7.3 Other Mechanisms . 38 8. LUND RECOMMENDATION ON ELECTIONS: NO. 10 . 40 8.1 Content Explanation . 40 8.1.1 District magnitude . 40 8.1.2 Territorial delimitation . 41 9. ENSURING FAIR CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS: THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ELECTIONS .
    [Show full text]
  • The Supplementary Vote Electoral System Again Worked Very Well in London
    blo gs.lse.ac.uk http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/23468 The Supplementary Vote electoral system again worked very well in London. There is no basis for arguing that voters don’t understand their choices Blog Admin A recent article on the London mayoral election suggested that the way the public voted showed that a majority of people did not understand the voting system used. Patrick Dunleavy explains why this criticism of the voting system is quite unfounded. Looking back at the mayoral election in London, James Ball writing in the Guardian Comment section outlines some problems as he sees it with the Supplementary Vote system used to elect London’s powerf ul mayor. He writes: The vast majority of voters decided to use their second preference vote: 1.76 million second preferences were cast, around 80% of the electorate. But only around one in 10 of these were actually counted towards the total. Of the 346,000 or so people who voted for one of the minority candidates, only 185,000 actually cast their vote in such a way as to influence the result. More than 1.1 million people cast their second preference for a candidate with no chance of being in the run-off for the final two. There are two ways to interpret the figures: a large portion of Londoners don’t fully understand the voting system, or they are using it in a remarkably sophisticated way to send subtle signals to minority candidates. If this was the case, there does seem to be a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Voting Systems in the UK
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 04458, 26 October 2017 By Neil Johnston Voting systems in the UK Inside: 1. Current voting systems 2. Electoral systems in the UK – recent developments 3. Previous government reviews of electoral systems 4. International comparisons www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Number 04458, 26 October 2017 2 Contents Summary 3 1. Current voting systems 4 1.1 First Past the Post (FPTP) 4 1.2 Alternative Vote (AV) 4 1.3 Supplementary Vote 4 1.4 Single Transferable Vote (STV) 5 1.5 Additional Member System 5 1.6 Closed Party List System 6 1.7 Table showing where the voting systems are used in the UK 7 2. Electoral systems in the UK – recent developments 8 2.1 The AV Referendum 8 2.2 Directly electing members of the National Park authorities in England 9 2.3 Devolution of elections to Wales 10 2.4 2017 manifesto commitments 10 3. Previous government reviews of electoral systems 12 3.1 Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System [October 1998] 12 3.2 Review of Voting Systems: the experience of new voting systems in the United Kingdom since 1997 [January 2008] 12 4. International comparisons 15 4.1 First Past the Post 15 4.2 Additional Member Systems – Germany and New Zealand 15 4.3 Two Round Systems – France 15 4.4 AV – Australia and Ireland 16 4.5 STV – Ireland 16 4.6 List Systems 16 Cover page image copyrightTo the polling station by Matt. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped.
    [Show full text]
  • Faclair Airson Riaghaltas Ionadail Gàidhlig Agus Beurla
    Faclair airson Riaghaltas Ionadail Gàidhlig agus Beurla Dictionary for Local Government Scottish Gaelic and English Air a chur ri chèile le Compiled by The European Language Initiative a bhuineas do mhodh : a thogas meanmna ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ a ghabhas leasachadh a nì bacadh br a rinneadh leis a‟ phrìomhaire remediable, obstructionist, prime-ministerial adj retrievable adj obstructive adj gnìomh a rinneadh leis suidheachadh a ghabhas innleachdan a nì bacadh a‟ phrìomhaire leasachadh obstructionist tactics a prime-ministerial action a retrievable situation à seo suas cgr A a nì mì-rian br adv hence a ghabhas obrachadh disruptive adj a bhuineas do mhodh viable adj giùlan a nì mì-rian procedural adj a sheallas inbhe moladh a ghabhas obrachadh disruptive behaviour prestigious adj a viable proposition a bhuineas don bhuidseat budgetary adj a rèir roi a sheasas na aonar a lìonas beàrn according to, stand-alone adj a bhuineas don phrìomhaire stop-gap adj relative (to) prep buidheann a sheasas na aonar a stand-alone body prime-ministerial adj a rèir an lagha according to law a mhair fada br a bhuineas don tuath luachan a rèir a chèile a tha a‟ tighinn a-steach br prolonged adj provincial adj relative values incoming adj thug am pàrtaidh dùbhlain cha tig na h-argamaidean ionnsaigh air an riaghaltas a mhair a dh‟aindeoin roi le gin a rèir a chèile a thaobh roi le gin fada notwithstanding adv the arguments are
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening New Brunswick's Democracy
    Strengthening New Brunswick’s Democracy Select Committee Discussion Paper on Electoral Reform July 2016 Strengthening New Brunswick’s Democracy Discussion Paper July 2016 Published by: Government of New Brunswick PO Box 6000 Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5H1 Canada Printed in New Brunswick ISBN 978-1- 4605-1033-9 (Print Bilingual) ISBN 978-1- 4605-1034-6 (PDF English) ISBN 978-1- 4605-1035-3 (PDF French) 10744 Table of Contents Select Committee on Electoral Reform 1 Message from the Government House Leader 2 How to use this discussion paper 3 Part 1: Introduction 4 Part 2: Making a more effective Legislature 8 Chapter 1: Eliminating barriers to entering politics for underrepresented groups 8 Chapter 2: Investigating means to improve participation in democracy 12 Internet voting 18 Part 3: Other electoral reform matters 20 Chapter 1: Election dates 20 Chapter 2: Election financing 21 Part 4: Conclusion 24 Part 5 : Appendices 25 Appendix A - Families of electoral systems 25 Appendix B - Voting systems 26 Appendix C - First-Past-the-Post 31 Appendix D - Preferential ballot voting: How does it work? 32 Appendix E- Election dates in New Brunswick 34 Appendix F - Fixed election dates: jurisdictional scan 36 Appendix G- Limits and expenses: Adjustments for inflation 37 Appendix H - Contributions: Limits and allowable sources jurisdictional scan 38 Appendix I - Mandate of the Parliamentary Special Committee on Electoral Reform 41 Appendix J - Glossary 42 Appendix K - Additional reading 45 Select Committee on Electoral Reform The Legislature’s Select Committee on Electoral Reform The committee is to table its final report at the Legislative is being established to examine democratic reform in the Assembly in January 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Your Vote Always Count? (Changing the Voting System)
    Should your vote always count? (Changing the voting system) Many attempts at producing a voting system that makes every vote count and prevent a minority of the electorate electing a governing body (especially a National Government). Voting systems 1. Plurality voting system/relative majority (First past the post /UK system) 2. Majority voting system (Requires more than half the votes cast/used by some institutions to elect executives/leaders) 3. Single Transferable Vote a. On Election Day, voters number a list of candidates. Their favourite as number one, their second favourite number two, and so on. Voters can put numbers next to as many or as few candidates as they like. Parties will often stand more than one candidate in each area. b. The numbers tell the people counting to move your vote if your favourite candidate has enough votes already or stands no chance of winning. 4. Alternative Vote a. The voter puts a number by each candidate, with a one for their favourite, two for their second favourite and so on. They can put numbers on as many or as few as they wish. b. If more than half the voters have the same favourite candidate, that person becomes the MP. If nobody gets half, the numbers provide instructions for what happens next. c. The counters remove whoever came last and look at the ballot papers with that candidate as their favourite. Rather than throwing away these votes, they move each vote to the voter’s second favourite candidate. This process repeated until one candidate has half of the votes and becomes the MP.
    [Show full text]
  • First Past the Post (FPTP), Also Known As Simple Majority Voting Or Plurality Voting
    First Past the Post First Past The Post (FPTP), also known as Simple majority voting or Plurality voting How does First Past The Post work? Under First Past The Post (FPTP) voting takes place in single-member constituencies. Voters put a cross in a box next to their favoured candidate and the candidate with the most votes in the constituency wins. All other votes count for nothing. We believe FPTP is the very worst system for electing a representative government. Where is First Past The Post used? FPTP is the second most widely used voting system in the world, after Party List-PR. In crude terms, it is used in places that are, or once were, British colonies. Of the many countries that use First Past The Post , the most commonly cited are the UK to elect members of the House of Commons, both chambers of the US Congress, and the lower houses in India and Canada. First Past The Post used to be even more widespread, but many countries that used to use it have adopted other systems. Find out more about reform overseas... Pros and cons of First Past The Post The case for The arguments against It's simple to understand and thus Representatives can get elected on tiny amounts of public support as it doesn't cost much to administer. does not matter by how much they win, only that they get more votes than other candidates. It doesn't take very long to count It encourages tactical voting, as voters vote not for the candidate they all the votes and work out who's most prefer, but against the candidate they most dislike.
    [Show full text]
  • Debating Electoral Reform in Canada Discussion Paper
    Renewing Democracy: Debating Electoral Reform in Canada Discussion Paper LAW COMMISSION OF CANADA COMMISSION DU DROIT DU CANADA Law Commission of Canada www.lcc.gc.ca Catalogue Number: JL2-20/2002 ISBN: 0-662-66769-7 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2002 Preface Canada prides itself on being a healthy and vibrant democracy. But we cannot be complacent: democracy requires constant tending. As society changes, Canadians must reflect on the quality of their democratic institutions and ask whether they continue to serve them well. Do we live in the democracy we want? Does it reflect our contemporary needs and values? Can we improve upon the practices of our democratic institutions? An important barometer of the health of governance relationships is the nature and quality of citizens’ participation in their democratic institutions. Several commentators have noted a decrease in voter turnout and a general disengagement of the citizenry from traditional political institutions. This has led some Canadians to raise questions about the electoral system. Does the act of voting continue to have the same significance for Canadians? Is it possible to remedy the democratic malaise that has come to characterize the Canadian political landscape? Should we take a critical look at some of our traditional democratic institutions? Does our voting system continue to respond to our needs and our values? The Law Commission of Canada is an independent, federal agency whose mandate is to systematically study law and legal institutions and to propose changes. This discussion paper on Electoral Reform is part of a project on Reform of Democratic Institutions, under the Law Commission’s larger program aimed at examining Governance Relationships.
    [Show full text]