Information Booklet This Booklet Is Published by the Committee Secretariat of the National Assembly of Québec

Our electoral system Your opinion counts !

Information booklet This booklet is published by the Committee Secretariat of the National Assembly of Québec. For information on the work of the Select Committee on the Election Act, write to the clerk of the Committee, Louis Breault, at the address given at the bottom of this page, or contact Mr. Breault by:

Telephone: (418) 643-2722; Fax: (418) 644-6981; or

Email: [email protected]

The Select Committee on the Election Act will hold public hearings beginning on 24 January 2006.

Submitting a brief

To take part in these consultations, you may submit a brief to the Committee no later than 20 December 2005. You must submit one letter-size copy of your brief, accompanied by a summary. Individuals and organizations wishing to have their brief distributed to members of the Press Gallery must submit 20 additional copies for that purpose. Though not obviating the need for paper copies, an electronic version of your brief, sent to the Committee by e-mail, would be much appreciated.

Being heard without a brief

You may indicate to the Committee that you wish to be heard without submitting a brief. If you wish to comment on the draft bill, you may do so on the consultation form provided in the centre of the booklet (a postage-paid return envelope is also provided).

It is up to the Committee to decide which individuals and organizations it will hear among those that, with or without a brief, manifest their desire to participate.

To consult an electronic version of the booklet, or to express your opinion by completing an online questionnaire, you may visit the Committee’s website at www.assnat.qc.ca/eng.

Our electoral system Your opinion counts ! National Assembly Édifice Pamphile-Le May 1035, rue des Parlementaires 3e étage Québec (Québec) G1A 1A3

LEGAL DEPOSIT – BIBLIOTHÈQUE NATIONALE DU QUÉBEC, 4th quarter 2005 ISBN 2-550-45685-8 TABLE OF CONTENTS

MEMBERS OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION ACT ...... 4

FOREWORD ...... 5 Select Committee on the Election Act ...... 5 Citizens committee ...... 5 Information booklet...... 5 Online consultation ...... 6

ELECTORAL REFORM: GENERAL QUESTIONS...... 7 Need for electoral reform...... 7 Regional representation and equal weight of votes ...... 7 Pertinence of holding a referendum on electoral reform ...... 8

ELECTORAL SYSTEMS ...... 9 Plurality-majority systems ...... 10 Proportional representation (PR)...... 11 Mixed systems ...... 12 Summary table: plurality-majority, PR and mixed systems: how they work ..14 Table: points to consider concerning the various electoral systems ...... 16 Electoral system proposed in the draft bill ...... 19

REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN AND ETHNOCULTURAL MINORITIES IN THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ...... 21 Measures proposed in the draft bill ...... 23

VOTING PROCEDURES ...... 24 Measures proposed in the draft bill ...... 25

OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ELECTION ACT ...... 26 Polling day...... 26 Electronic voting ...... 26 Fixed-date elections ...... 27 List of electors ...... 27 Electoral map...... 27

SCHEDULES ...... 28 Historical summary of debate on electoral reform in Québec ...... 28 Election results in Québec since 1960 ...... 29

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 3 MEMBERS OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION ACT

Chair Mr. François Ouimet Member for Marquette (Québec Liberal Party) Chair of the Committee on Planning and the Public Domain

Vice-chair Mr. Sylvain Simard Member for Richelieu (Parti québécois) Chair of the Committee on Institutions Official Opposition critic for the Conseil du trésor and for government services

Members Mr. André Gabias Member for Trois-Rivières (Québec Liberal Party) Parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade Ms. Fatima Houda-Pepin Member for La Pinière (Québec Liberal Party) Chair of the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Mr. Benoît Pelletier Member for Chapleau (Québec Liberal Party) Minister responsible for Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs, Francophones within Canada, the Agreement on Internal Trade, the Reform of Democratic Institutions and Access to Information Ms. Sarah Perreault Member for Chauveau (Québec Liberal Party) Vice-chair of the Committee on Public Administration Mr. Marc Picard Member for Chutes-de-la-Chaudière (Action démocratique du Québec) Ms. Lorraine Richard Member for Duplessis (Parti québécois) Official Opposition critic for maritime affairs Mr. Luc Thériault Member for Masson (Parti québécois) Official Opposition critic for the reform of democratic institutions

Citizens committee Mr. Mustapha Acharid (Laval) Mr. Guillaume Boivin (Québec) Mr. Charles Gaboury (Montréal) Ms. Carole Hadd (Shawinigan) Ms. Martine Lafontaine (Baie-Comeau) Ms. Yohanna Loucheur (Gatineau) Mr. Michel Morisset (Baie-des-Sables) Ms. Mélanie Proulx (Sainte-Julie)

4 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! FOREWORD

SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION ACT Election Act Statute governing the electoral On 15 July 2005, the National Assembly of Québec adopted a motion to process and all related opera- create a special parliamentary committee charged with examining the draft bill to tions and activities. replace the Election Act. The bill was tabled by the Government on 15 December 2004.

The mandate of the Select Committee on the Election Act is to consult the people of Québec on a large number of issues including the electoral system, the representation of women and ethnocultural minorities in the National Assembly and voting procedures. To reach the largest possible number of people, the Committee will hold hearings in cities and towns throughout Québec, and may use video- conferencing.

In the course of its activities, the Committee will also hear from the Chief Electoral Officer, Québec’s political parties, and experts on electoral matters.

CITIZENS COMMITTEE

A unique feature of the Committee is that its members will be accompanied throughout their term by eight individuals selected at random from the Québec population. These four men and four women of different ages will make their views known as members of the public, supplementing the views of the Committee members. They may also, once the consultation process has ended, submit their observa- tions, conclusions and recommendations to the Committee.

INFORMATION BOOKLET

The subjects examined by the Committee have a direct impact on our democracy. This booklet is designed to facilitate public participation by presenting inform- ative and thought-provoking facts on electoral issues, particularly with regard to electoral systems. It also summarizes the major directions of the draft bill.

The questionnaire on the detachable central page of the booklet is designed to stimulate your thinking on these subjects, and should not be returned to the Committee. The questions it contains are based on the information provided in the booklet. Please note that you are not required to appear before the Committee in order to make your views known. If you wish, you may use the form and envelope provided in the booklet to give your comments on the draft bill. Simply mail the completed form to the Committee, or deliver it directly to the Committee when hearings are held in your region.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 5 ONLINE CONSULTATION

You may also participate online. To send your comments to the Committee via the Internet, consult the electronic version of this booklet at www.assnat.qc.ca/eng.

A wide-ranging examination of Québec’s electoral system is vital for the health of our democratic institutions, and must enlist the participation of as many citizens as possible. The Committee therefore invites all Quebecers to make their views known during this unique consultation process.

6 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! ELECTORAL REFORM: GENERAL QUESTIONS

In Québec, debate on the electoral system began in earnest in the 1960s. Fuelled by the various reform proposals of the 1970s and 1980s, this debate has intensified since the election of 1998.

NEED FOR ELECTORAL REFORM

The proponents of change see electoral reform as a means of putting the citi- zen back at the heart of the democratic process. An electoral system that eliminated distortions would do much, say the change-seekers, to remedy the attitudes of apa- thy and cynicism that many people hold with regard to politics and politicians. Electoral reform would thus help establish a new footing for the democratic process, one that would be more inclusive for the citizenry and more representative of the political realities of the 21st century.

Others believe that the current system is the best possible system for Québec, in particular because it tends to result in majority governments and to facilitate the alternation of political power between incumbent governments and opposition parties. For the advocates of this view, electoral reform is clearly not the best way of rejuvenating people’s interest in politics.

The positions taken on electoral reform are enormously diverse. Accordingly, broad-based consultations are needed to gauge the desirability of reform and determine which electoral system best responds to the needs of voters and the realities of Québec society.

REGIONAL REPRESENTATION AND THE EQUAL WEIGHT OF VOTES

No electoral system is perfect, and difficult choices must inevitably be made in trying to ensure regional representation and the equal weight of votes. Under the current system, regions that have sustained a loss of population continue, because of certain concessions, to elect the same number of members as before, which ensures that their representation in the National Assembly remains constant. Members from urban constituencies therefore tend to represent proportionately more people than do Members from rural constituencies. On the grounds that each person’s vote should have equal weight regardless of where one happens to live, some critics see in this arrangement a serious flaw in our democratic system.

The challenge, finally, is to achieve a healthy balance between regional representation and representation that adequately reflects the will of the people as a whole.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 7 PERTINENCE OF HOLDING A REFERENDUM ON ELECTORAL REFORM

Any eventual reform of Québec’s electoral system will have important reper- cussions on the citizenry as a whole and profoundly modify the way our political system works. The consultations held by the Committee will give ordinary citizens a chance to have their say on the current system, the Government’s proposal, and any other electoral system that might be considered for Québec.

Québec may implement a new electoral system by passing a law to that effect or following a province-wide referendum.

THREEFOLD ROLE OF MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

To legislate: To act as a check on To act as intermediaries the Government: between citizens and the public administration:

Members examine, ana- Members can question Members act as ombuds- lyze and pass bills in the the Government’s actions men, mediators, informa- National Assembly. This in a number of ways, tion officers and organi- involves multiple stages both in the Assembly and zers, listening to their as bills go through the in parliamentary commit- fellow-citizens and divi- Assembly and parliamen- tee. ding their time between tary committee. parliamentary duties and their constituencies. They also ensure that their communities receive a fair share from public programs.

8 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

We live in a representative democracy in which citizens express their will by electing members to the National Assembly. The electoral system determines the specific way in which voters elect the people who are to represent them.

Since our electoral system determines how votes translate into seats, the adoption of a new or modified system will directly affect how different political options are represented and how governments are formed.

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY

Members (currently numbering 125) are elected to the National Assembly to represent the people, make laws and provide a check to the actions of VOTE the Government.

The Government directs the actions of Some 5.5 million people On polling day, the State and fulfils its are registered to vote in voters elect their administrative function Québec. representatives according according to the laws to the electoral passed by the National system in force. Assembly.

Electoral systems can be divided into two main families: plurality-majority and proportional.

• Under plurality-majority systems, the candidate who receives the largest number of votes in a given constituency is declared elected and obtains a seat in Parliament. • Under systems of proportional representation, each party obtains a percentage of seats that reflects as closely as possible the percentage of its popular vote. Members are elected from a list of candidates provided by the parties.

Some countries use a mixed system that integrates elements of both plurality- majority and proportional systems. This is the case for the mixed compensatory proportional representation system proposed in the draft bill.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 9 PLURALITY-MAJORITY SYSTEMS Absolute majority First-past-the-post system A majority consisting of more than half of the valid votes.

This is the system currently used in Québec and the rest of Canada. It requires Relative majority that the territory covered by the election be divided into electoral constituencies of roughly equal voting strength. After a single round of voting, the winner in each Majority obtained by a candidate who received more votes constituency is the candidate who receives the most votes, even if this is less than than the other candidates without 50% of the valid votes cast. reaching an absolute majority

The first-past-the-post system tends to result in one party’s obtaining a majo- Third party rity of seats and forming the government, with the second-place party forming the In a two-party context, a party official opposition. In Québec, the number of seats a party obtains has often been that is smaller than both the disproportionate to the popular vote it received. The resulting “winner’s bonus” majority party and the Official (in terms of seats) means that the party forming the government is assured of a Opposition. certain stability that allows it to pursue its political program efficiently, without having to make continual concessions to other parties. This is also, however, the aspect of the system that critics see as its principal weakness. 1. Preferential ballot of the kind used in Australia to elect members to the House of Representatives. Absolute majority systems 2. Plurality-majority ballot of Under two other plurality-majority systems, known as the two- the kind used in Québec round system and preferential or alternative voting, each candi- 1 BALLOT elections. date must obtain at least 50% of the vote in his or her con- HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES stituency in order to be elected. CONSTITUENCY

The two-round system, used in France and other countries, dif- Number boxes 1 to 10 in order 2 of preference fers from our system in requiring that candidates obtain at least 3 LAST NAME First name 50% of the vote to be elected after the first round of voting. If Party A no candidate receives 50% of the vote, a second round of vot- 5 LAST NAME First name ing decides the matter between the top-finishing candidates of Independent the first round. 8 LAST NAME First name Independent Like the two-round system, preferential voting is designed to 10 LAST NAME First name have representatives elected by an absolute majority. Instead of Party B LAST NAME First name marking their ballots with an “x” beside the name of the can- 1 LAST NAME First name Political affiliation Party C didate of their choice, voters rank the candidates in order of 6 LAST NAME First name preference—1, 2, 3, etc. When the votes are counted, the can- Party D didate with more than 50% of first choices is declared elected. LAST NAME First name x 7 LAST NAME First name Political affiliation If there is no absolute majority, the candidates who received the Independent fewest first choices are eliminated, and the votes are reallocat- 2 LAST NAME First name Party E ed on the basis of the second choices appearing on ballots that LAST NAME First name show an eliminated candidate as first choice. This procedure is 9 LAST NAME First name Political affiliation repeated until a candidate obtains an absolute majority. Party F 4 LAST NAME First name Party G Don’t forget to number each LAST NAME First name box so that your vote counts Independent

10 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION (PR) SYSTEMS

List PR system

Of PR systems, the most common is the list PR system. List systems require larger electoral districts than first-past-the-post systems, since each constituency is represented by a number of members (hence the term “multi-member”). List systems may be national or regional. In the first case, the territory covered by the election forms a single, country-wide constituency, as in Israel and the Netherlands (the latter country’s electoral map consists of a country-wide constituency of 150 seats). In the second case, the territory is divided into regional constituencies each possessing a number of seats, as in most Scandinavian countries.

Under a list system, political parties run a list of candidates in each constituency. Voters choose from among the lists, marking their ballots for the party of their choice. The number of seats allocated to a given party is calculated so as to reflect that party’s share of the vote. In accordance with the number of seats allocated to each party, candidates are declared elected on the basis of their position on the list.

There are two main types of list: • the closed list : Voters choose the list of the party of their choice. Parties determine beforehand the order in which their candidates appear on the list. • the open list : Voters can vote for an individual candidate appearing on a party’s list, thus having their say in who specifically is elected.

Single transferable vote (STV) BALLOT • Three members to be elected STV allows voters to support one or more candidates. • Number boxes in order of preference • Enter “1” in the box for your first-choice Constituencies are multi-member, and each party runs a list of candidate and, if you wish, indicate sub- candidates. Voters mark their ballots for the candidates of all sequent choices in order of preference parties in order of preference, as in preferential voting. Under LAST NAME First name Party A 4 a calculation method particular to STV, seats go to the candi- LAST NAME First name Party A 1 dates with the most votes, after reallocation of second-choice LAST NAME First name Party A 2 votes indicated on (a) the ballots of candidates who were eliminated because they did not receive enough first-choice LAST NAME First name Indépendant 3 votes and (b) the ballots of candidates who received more than STV ballot of the kind the threshold number of first-choice votes required to be presented in the final LAST NAME First name Party B 6 declared elected. (The threshold is obtained by dividing the report of the B.C. Citizens’ LAST NAME First name Party B total number of votes cast in a constituency by the number of Assembly on electoral reform LAST NAME First name Party B members to be elected.) in that province. LAST NAME First name Party C 5

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 11 MIXED SYSTEMS

Under mixed electoral systems, voters elect their representatives on a plurality- majority basis in the constituencies and on a PR-basis using lists.

Mixed compensatory system

The archetype of mixed systems is to be found in Germany, where half the members of the Bundestag (German Lower House) are elected under a first-past- the-post system and half are elected on the basis of lists that ensure an overall proportional result. The second component of the system thus “compensates” for the non-proportional effects of the first.

Mixed systems must be examined from a number of perspectives: how votes are to be exercised (one or two votes), the ratio of constituency seats (first-past- the-post) to “compensatory” seats, territorial distribution of compensatory seats and representation thresholds.

In most societies using a mixed system, voters have two votes, often on the same ballot. One vote is cast for the list of You have 2 votes a political party, the other for a constituency representative. 1 vote here 1 vote here for a member to represent German federal elections are carried out in this way, the first your constituency for a party’s list vote serving to elect constituency representatives on a first- LAST NAME First name PARTY A past-the-post basis, the second to determine the overall pro- PARTY A portion of seats each party may have in the Bundestag (see LAST NAME First name PARTY B example opposite). PARTY B

LAST NAME First name Some mixed systems operate on a single-vote basis, in PARTY C PARTY C which case the elector’s vote serves both to elect a constituency representative and to calculate a compensatory factor. LAST NAME First name x PARTY D PARTY D Seats may be allocated to parties on a regional or ter- PARTY E ritory-wide basis. The compensatory aspect of the system operates on the national level in New Zealand and on the LAST NAME First name x regional level in Scotland. PARTY F PARTY F

PARTY G

PARTY H

Ballot of the kind used to elect members to Germany’s Bundestag under a mixed compensatory system.

12 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! The proportion of compensatory seats, like the size of the regions, is an important factor in ensuring the overall proportionality of results. The higher the percentage of compensatory seats, the more the results in terms of seats in parliament will be proportionate to the popular vote.

Some countries using a mixed compensatory system (or, for that matter, a PR list system) impose a minimum percentage threshold of votes a party must obtain in order to be allocated seats. The threshold in Germany is 5%, but it does not apply to parties that elect at least three constituency representatives.

NAME OF CONSTITUENCY Parallel system (a type of mixed system) Vote for only one candidate Parallel systems, such as that found in Japan, ♠ LAST NAME appear from the voter’s point of view to First name Party function much like a compensatory system.

❆ LAST NAME However, the two categories of members are First name elected separately. In addition, while consti- Party tuency representatives are elected on a plu- LAST NAME First name rality-majority basis, the vote for the list of a Party party serves only to elect members on the list ▲ LAST NAME and is not used to offset the non-proportional First name x effect of first-past-the-post results. Such a Party system is also called a “non-compensatory” LAST NAME system. First name

♥ LAST NAME First name Party

Name of electoral district Mark only one X on this ballot

PARTY A ♠ (First candidate, second candidate, third candidate, fourth candidate, fifth candidate, sixth candidate, seventh candidate, eighth candidate, ninth candidate, tenth candidate) ❆ PARTY B (First candidate, second candidate, third candidate, fourth candidate, fifth candidate, sixth candidate) ▲ PARTY C (First candidate, second candidate, third candidate, fourth candidate, fifth candidate, sixth candidate, seventh candidate, eighth candidate, ninth candidate, tenth candidate)

♥ PARTY D (First candidate, second candidate, third candidate, fourth candidate)

❀ PARTY E (First candidate, second candidate, third candidate, fourth candidate, x fifth candidate, sixth candidate, seventh candidate, eighth candidate)

LAST NAME OF INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE First name

Example of a mixed compensatory ballot based on the Scottish Parliament model.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 13 SUMMARY TABLE: PLURALITY-MAJORITY, PROPORTIONAL AND MIXED SYSTEMS

CHARACTERISTICS MAJORITY SYSTEMS MIXED COMPENSATORY PROPORTIONAL SYSTEMS REPRESENTATION (PR)

Electoral Single-member constituencies Two levels of electoral Regional proportional territories territories: and single transferable vote: Single-member constituencies Multi-member and electoral districts multi-member electoral districts or single multi-member “Pure” proportional system: constituency for the whole Single multi-member constit- territory uency for the whole territory

The elector’s vote First-past-the-post or Single-vote system: Closed list: two-round system : The elector votes for a candidate The elector votes for a party list The elector votes for one candi- and that candidate’s party in his date in his or her constituency or her constituency Open list: The elector votes for a candidate Preferential vote: Two-vote system: on the party list The elector ranks the candi- The elector votes for a candidate dates by order of preference in his or her constituency Candidates who obtained the and most votes end up at the top of votes for a political party list the list (closed or open) in his or her electoral district Single transferable vote: The elector ranks the candidates by order of preference

14 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! SUMMARY TABLE: PLURALITY-MAJORITY, PROPORTIONAL AND MIXED SYSTEMS

CHARACTERISTICS MAJORITY SYSTEMS MIXED COMPENSATORY PROPORTIONAL SYSTEMS REPRESENTATION (PR)

Determining First-past-the-post system: In the constituencies: List PR: elected candidates The candidate who obtains the The candidate who obtains The seats are awarded to the most votes in each constituency the most votes is elected parties according to the percen- is elected and tage of votes they obtained in the electoral districts or in Two-round system: the single constituency: The seats are then awarded to The candidate who obtains The seats are awarded to the the candidates according to more than 50% of the votes in parties according to the percent- their position on their party list each constituency is declared age of votes they obtained, tak- elected ing into account the number of Single transferable vote: seats they obtained in the con- The seats are awarded to the A second ballot is held if no stituencies candidates who obtained the candidate obtains that result in most votes, after redistribution the first ballot The seats are then awarded to of the second-choice votes the candidates according to their indicated on the ballots cast Preferential vote: position on their party list for the candidates who received The candidate who obtains an insufficient number of first- more than 50% of the first If a candidate is already elected choice votes or more first-choice choice votes is elected as a constituency member, the votes than required to be next candidate on the list is declared elected If no candidate obtains more elected than 50% of the votes, the second and third choices are considered

Filling vacant By-elections are organized In the constituencies: The next candidate on the list of seats By-elections are organized the party that obtained the seat is elected In the electoral districts or in the single constituency : If there are no more names on The next candidate on the list the list, the seat remains vacant of the party that obtained the until the next general election seat is elected

If there are no more names on the list, the seat remains vacant until the next general election

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 15 TABLE: POINTS TO CONSIDER CONCERNING THE VARIOUS ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

MIXED COMPENSATORY PROPORTIONAL FIRST-PAST-THE-POST SYSTEM REPRESENTATION (PR)

Level of • Distortions sometimes make • A complex calculation process • The basic principle of propor- complexity results difficult to interpret is needed to allocate seats tional representation—that a • Voting and vote-counting are among the parties party’s seats in Parliament simple should be roughly proportion- With a single vote: ate to the popular vote it • Voting is easy received—is easy to grasp • A complex calculation process With two votes: is needed to allocate seats • It is possible to vote for the among the parties constituency candidate of one • Voting is easy, except in an party and the list of another open-list system (split voting)

Rapport between • Relatively small single- • Single-member constituencies, • Multi-member electoral dis- voters and member constituencies though generally larger, still tricts mean that each voter members, regional encourage direct contact encourage direct contact is represented by more than representation between voters and their between voters and their one member, potentially from elected representative elected representative different parties • As long as the electoral map • Multi-member electoral dis- • Regional representation in does not change, regional tricts mean that each voter is Parliament is ensured because representation in Parliament represented by more than one of single-member constituen- remains constant from one member, potentially from dif- cies; the total representation election to the next ferent parties depends on parties’ candidate • Members are of two types, lists and the size of the elec- those elected in constituencies toral district, and may there- and those declared elected in fore vary greatly from one electoral districts on the basis election to the next of party lists • Good possibility that each • Regional representation in region will be represented by Parliament is ensured because members from all major parties of single-member constituencies; the total representation depends on parties’ candidate lists and the size of the electoral district, and may therefore vary greatly from one election to the next • Good possibility that each region will be represented by members from all major parties

16 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! TABLE: POINTS TO CONSIDER CONCERNING THE VARIOUS ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

PROPORTIONAL FIRST-PAST-THE-POST MIXED COMPENSATORY SYSTEM REPRESENTATION (PR)

Representation • The party that wins the elec- • The representation of parties in parliament is a fairly accurate of parties in tion often obtains a number reflection of the popular vote Parliament of seats largely dispropor- • Distortions may persist, especially in mixed systems tionate to the popular vote • Smaller parties have a better chance under PR, since a relatively it received smaller concentration of votes can win a seat • Such distortions can seem a • Larger parties are more likely to be represented in every region poor reflection of the people’s • Since every vote counts in the calculation of proportionality, parties will, since it is possible for a must campaign everywhere in order to maximize their electoral party to form a government results without receiving the most • After election day, negotiations to form a coalition government* votes may go on between the parties for a several days • Voters may tend to vote only for candidates or parties they think have a chance of being elected • Parties generally have local organizations and must receive a relatively large percentage of the vote in order to have candidates elected • The system sometimes creates “regional monopolies”— regions represented by members from one party over several elections • To win an election, parties concentrate their energies on the constituencies and regions where the race is close

* A government formed of members of two or more parties continued on next page

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 17 TABLE: POINTS TO CONSIDER CONCERNING THE VARIOUS ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

MIXED COMPENSATORY PROPORTIONAL FIRST-PAST-THE-POST SYSTEM REPRESENTATION (PR)

Government • Because it inflates the majo- • PR systems tend not to favour majority governments and are effectiveness rity of the victor, this system generally associated with the formation of minority** or coalition is generally associated with governments the formation of majority • To make their policies and carry out their political programs, such governments* governments must obtain the collaboration of other parties • A majority government can • This situation can result in a more consensual political climate, make its policies and carry since parties must negotiate with each other and may even have to out its program without share power in a coalition having to negotiate agree- • With minority and coalition governments, it may be difficult to ments with other parties determine the degree of responsibility of each party • The people responsible for government decisions can be readily identified in a majority government • When there are two main parties, voters can protest the actions of the party in power by voting for the other

* Government formed by a party that has a majority of seats in Parliament ** Government formed by a party that does not have a majority of seats in Parliament and must therefore have the confidence of one or more other parties to remain in power

18 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! ELECTORAL SYSTEM PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT BILL: MIXED COMPENSATORY SYSTEM

In the draft bill to replace the Election Act, the electoral system proposed is a mixed compensatory system.

One of the objectives of this system is to redress imbalances between the percentage of votes a party receives and its representation in the National Assembly. Smaller parties are also expected to be better served by the system. These objectives would be achieved without alienating voters from their elected representatives or compromising voters’ sense of belonging to their region.

Re-examining the electoral process: a worldwide trend

Québec is not the only parliamentary democracy, in these first years of the 21st century, to be examining the state of its democracy and the appropriateness of its electoral system.* Italy and New Zealand reformed their electoral systems in 1993 and Japan did so in 1994. New Zealand, one of the oldest parliamentary democracies in the British tradition, replaced its first-past-the- post system with a mixed system similar to that implemented in Germany almost 50 years ago. In 1998, the United Kingdom’s Independent Commission on the Voting System (Jenkins Commission) recommended in its report that a mixed system be adopted. Also in the United Kingdom, decentralization in favour of the regions (“devolution”) has allowed new electoral systems to be tried in Scotland and Wales.

Interest in electoral reform is also increasingly strong in Canada. Consultation and reflection on the subject are under way not only in Québec, but in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Ontario. In British Columbia, a referendum on whether to implement a new (single transferable vote) system was held in May 2005, and a second referendum is planned for 2008, in time for the election the following year.

* See page 28 for a historical summary of the debate on electoral reform in Québec.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 19 Members to be elected in two ways

Under the proposed Québec model, members would be elected in two ways. Seventy-seven members would be elected in single-member constituencies (called “divisions” in the draft bill), and 50 members would be elected, on the basis of party lists, in multi-member electoral districts each comprising (generally) three constituencies. The total number of seats would increase from 125 to 127.

77 constituency seats 127 seats: 50 “compensatory” seats (two per district as a rule)

There would be between 24 and 27 districts, each represented (generally) by five elected representatives of whom three would be elected in their constituencies and two on the basis of party lists. The ratio of constituency to compensatory representatives would therefore be 60:40, that is, 60% of the former and 40% of the latter. Parties would run a “closed” list of candidates in each district, and a person could run both in a constituency and on a list (“double candidacy”).

Three contiguous constituen- The three constituencies are grouped to cies numbered 1, 2 and 3. form a multi-member electoral dis- As under the present trict, here called district A. District A is system, these are single- represented by two members cho- member constituencies. sen from party lists in addition to Each therefore is repre- the three constituency members. sented by a member, The region is therefore represented for a total of three mem- by a total of five members. bers for the region.

As is currently the case, voters would cast a single vote. However, this vote would serve not only to elect a constituency representative, but also to calculate a compensatory factor for the election of district representatives. Thus, a vote for a For more information on the electoral system and other constituency representative would also be a vote for his or her party at the district measures proposed in the draft level. bill, you may wish to consult the documents on the Web site Compensatory seats would be distributed according to the d’Hondt technique of the Secrétariat à la réforme des institutions démocratiques and allocated to candidates following their order of appearance on party lists. If the et à l’accès à l’information, at winning “list” candidate was elected in his or her constituency, and therefore had a the following address: seat, the compensatory seat would go to the next candidate on the party list. www.institutions-democra- tiques.gouv.qc.ca/publications/publications.htm. 20 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN AND ETHNOCULTURAL MINORITIES IN THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

Critics increasingly point to the fact that women and persons from ethnocultural minorities are under-represented in the National Assembly.

Women

Some studies suggest that PR systems are more favourable to the election of women than is the first-past-the-post system, and it is a fact that most democracies where women make up at least 35 percent of members in Parliament use a PR system.

TABLE: PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN MEMBERS IN SINGLE CHAMBER PARLIAMENTS AND LOWER HOUSES WORLDWIDE1

ELECTORAL SYSTEM TOTAL NUMBER WOMEN % OF OF SEATS ELECTED WOMEN Sweden list PR 349 158 45.3 Scotland mixed compensatory 129 51 39.5 Norway list PR 169 64 37.9 Spain list PR 350 12 36 Belgium list PR 150 52 34.7 Vermont (U.S.A.) first-past-the-post 150 50 33.3 New Zealand mixed compensatory 121 39 32.2 Québec first-past-the-post 125 40 32 Germany mixed compensatory 614 195 31.8 California (U.S.A.) first-past-the-post 80 25 31.3 Australia preferential (alternative) 150 37 24.7 Ontario first-past-the-post 103 23 22.3 British Columbia first-past-the-post 79 17 21.5 Portugal list PR 230 49 21.3 Canada (House of Commons) first-past-the-post 308 65 21.1 United Kingdom first-past-the-post 646 127 19.7 United States (House of representatives) first-past-the-post 435 66 15.2 Israel list PR 120 18 15 Ireland single transferable vote 166 22 13.3 New Brunswick first-past-the-post 55 7 12.7 France two-round 574 70 12.2 Italy mixed compensatory 616 71 11.5 Alabama (U.S.A.) first-past-the-post 105 11 10.5 Venezuela mixed compensatory 165 16 9.7 Japan parallel 480 43 9

1.Sources: Inter-Parliamentary Union, “Women in National Parliaments”, Situation as of September 30, 2005, www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm; Research Centre on Women and Politics, University of Ottawa, www.socialsciences.uottawa.ca/crfp-rcwp/eng/statistics.asp; Center for American Women and Politics, www.rci.rutgers.edu/~cawp; “Women’s Representation in Politics”, Women & Equality Unit, http://164.36.38.98/public_life/parliament.htm; National Assembly of Québec, “La présence féminine”, www.assnat.qc.ca/fra/patrimoine/femmes1.html

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 21 And yet, since 1961, when the first woman member was elected to the National Assembly, much progress has been made. Today, 32% of the seats in the Assembly belong to women, a larger percentage than that found in most other British-style parliamentary assemblies. Even some PR systems around the world have failed to do as well in this regard.

The type of electoral system is only one factor affecting the election of women candidates. Other factors, such as the reigning political culture and the parties’ candidate-selection process, are also important. A PR system may help to improve women’s position in political life, but it is not always enough.

Ethnocultural minorities and Native peoples

It is safe to assume that the first-past-the-post system tends to make it harder not only for women, but for also for representatives of ethnocultural minorities and Native peoples to be elected.

In 2001, 12.8% of Québec’s population identified themselves as belonging to an ethnocultural minority. Of these, 7% identified themselves as a visible minority and 5.8% gave their maternal language as being other than French or English. These numbers do not include anglophones (people whose mother tongue is English), who make up 7.3% of the population. Québec’s Native peoples (Amerindian and Inuit), with 83,000 individuals from 11 nations, make up approximately 1% of the population. This means that ethnocultural minorities account for 20.1% of the total population.

In some countries, seats are reserved for representatives from specific groups. Since 1867, New Zealand has reserved seats for its Aboriginal people, the Maoris, who in 2001 made up approximately 14% of the total population.

22 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! MEASURES PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT BILL: REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN AND ETHNOCULTURAL MINORITIES

The draft bill proposes financial incentives to ensure that women and ethnocultural minorities are better represented in the National Assembly. These incentives comprise two components.

For women, the incentives are as follows:

1. The annual allowance of a party would be increased if it ran a significant proportion of women candidates. 2. Women candidates who received at least 15% of the vote in their constituencies would obtain a larger reimbursement of election expenses. This reimbursement would increase on the basis of the percentage of women candidates the party ran.

These incentives would be eliminated once the percentage of seats held by women reached 50%.

The same incentives would be implemented for ethnocultural minorities:

1. The annual allowance of a party would be increased if it ran a significant proportion of candidates from ethnocultural minorities. 2.Candidates from ethnocultural minorities who received at least 15% of the vote in their constituencies would obtain a larger reimbursement of election expenses. This reimbursement would increase on the basis of the percentage of such candidates the party ran.

These incentives would be eliminated once the percentage of seats held by people from ethnocultural minorities reached 20%. A woman belonging to an enthnocultural minority would be eligible for the incentives both for women and for ethnocultural minorities, resulting in an even larger reimbursement if her party met the candidate thresholds in both categories.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 23 VOTING PROCEDURES

The Government’s project to reform democratic institutions does not stop at electoral reform. Another goal is to improve how voting is actually organized and car- Voter turnout ried out. Frequent low voter turnout is reason enough to begin adapting the exercise The percentage of electors who of our democratic options to the needs of the people and to the realities of an aging actually voted during an election, in comparison with the population, a changing work world, social change and technological progress. electors on the permanent list of electors. The Chief Electoral Officer of Québec has proposed a number of amendments to the Election Act aimed at making voting easier and increasing voter turnout, and suggested avenues for action in a report published in 2004.2

TABLE: VOTER TURNOUT IN QUÉBEC GENERAL ELECTIONS SINCE 1960 (SOURCE: CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER)

100 %

90 85.3 84.2 85 81.7 82.5 81.6 79.6 80.4 80 78.3 75.6 75.0 75 73.6 70.4 70

50 1960 1962 1966 1970 1973 1976 1981 1985 1989 1994 1998 2003

2. Chief Electoral Officer, Améliorer le droit de vote et son exercice, April 2004.

24 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! MEASURES PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT BILL (VOTING PROCEDURES) Chief Electoral Officer Independent institution that The draft bill proposes the following measures: reports to the National Assembly whose mission is to administer • extending the revision period for the list of electors, setting up mobile boards the electoral system with a view to electing members to the of revisors and allowing revision requests to be filed by mail, fax or elec- National Assembly and, up to a tronic means; certain point, members to the municipal councils and school • allowing voting in any of the offices set up by the returning officer in an boards, while guaranteeing electoral division over the entire electoral period; Québec electors the free exercise of their voting rights. • allowing all eligible voters domiciled in Québec to vote by correspondence; and • extending advance polling hours and allowing advance polling in private res- idences for the elderly.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 25 OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ELECTION ACT

POLLING DAY

At present, elections in Québec are always held on a Monday. Some observers think Sunday would be a better choice, since

• premises for polling stations would be more readily available; • children would not have to miss school; • electoral personnel and political party volunteers would be easier to recruit; • the impact of the four consecutive hours that employers must allow for their employees to vote would be less severely felt.3

Others believe that elections should continue to be held on a weekday, in accordance with tradition.

ELECTRONIC VOTING

New voting technologies hold promise for increasing voter participation, but questions persist concerning the danger these technologies pose to the integrity and security of the electoral system.4

Electronic voting (voting terminals and electronic ballot boxes) reduces waiting time for voters and ensures a faster vote-count, but raises questions of reliability.

As for voting via the Internet, few experiments have been conducted to date, although 1% of electors in the Estonian municipal elections of 2005 cast their votes by this method. Internet voting would appear to encourage voter participation, but experts have pointed to the possible risks involved with regard to accessibility, security and the right to a secret vote.

3. Ibid., pp. 58-59 4. Ibid., p. 47

26 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! FIXED-DATE ELECTIONS

Fixed-date elections are one of the most often advanced aspects of electoral reform. Traditionally, British-style parliamentary systems have left the choice of an election date up to the first minister, who must call an election before his or her term of government is up (maximum five years).

In 2001, British Columbia passed a law making 17 May election day for 2005 and every four years thereafter. Similar measures are being considered in New Brunswick, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador.

LIST OF ELECTORS

The list of electors contains the names of, and other pertinent information regarding, persons who meet the requirements to be eligible to vote. This list is con- sulted by electoral personnel when voters show up at a polling station to vote.

In 1995, Québec adopted a permanent list of electors. The draft bill contains provisions to facilitate registration on the list and the list’s revision, as well as measures designed to make the revision process less cumbersome. In addition, revision services would be made more accessible to persons with functional limitations.

ELECTORAL MAP

The Commission de la représentation électorale is a neutral body charged with reviewing the electoral map every two elections. As a rule, constituencies must have the same number of electors, give or take 25%; however, the Commission currently has the discretionary power to waive this rule and create “exceptional” constituencies.

The draft bill would abolish this discretionary power and reduce the 25% leeway factor to 15%, with the number of voters being based on demographic projections rather than on voter registration lists. The Îles-de-la-Madeleine and Nunavik constituencies would be granted special status because of their geogra- phical circumstances.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 27 SCHEDULES

HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF DEBATE ON ELECTORAL REFORM IN QUÉBEC

Year Month Event

1972 December Major electoral boundary reform intended to eliminate imbalances favourable to certain constituencies.

1979 24 April Robert Burns, Minister of State for Electoral Reform, tables the Green Paper on electoral reform, entitled Un citoyen, un vote

1984 March Report of the Commission de la représentation électorale, entitled Pour un mode de scrutin équitable : la proportionnelle territoriale. The report proposes a variant of the regional proportional system.

2002 October – The Steering Committee of the Estates-General on the Reform of November Democratic Institutions, presided by Mr. Claude Béland, carries out consultations in 20 Québec cities and towns concerning the issues discussed in the study paper entitled Le Pouvoir aux citoyens et aux citoyennes by Minister Jean-Pierre Charbonneau. In October, the Chair of the Standing Committee on Institutions of the National Assembly, Mr. Claude Lachance, tables the consultation paper entitled The Reform of the Voting System in Québec in the National Assembly. In November, the Committee on Institutions holds special consultations with four electoral system experts all of whom are in favour of a mixed system.

2003 21-23 February The Estates-General on the Reform of Democratic Institutions are held in Québec. Close to 1,000 participants vote 90 % in favour of a new electoral system.

10 March Report of the Steering Committee of the Estates-General. The Committee recommends the adoption of a regional proportional system.

2004 15 December The Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions, Mr. Jacques P. Dupuis, tables a draft bill providing for the implementation of a new mixed proportional electoral system.

2005 15 June Creation of the Select Committee on the Election Act (SCEA).

28 OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! ELECTION RESULTS IN QUÉBEC SINCE 1960

ELECTIONS IN QUÉBEC

LIBERAL PARTY PARTI QUÉBECOIS UNION NATIONALE RALLIEMENT CRÉDITISTE YEAR % VOTE SEATS (%) % VOTE SEATS (%) % VOTE SEATS (%)

1960* 51.0 % 51 (53.7 %) - - 46.0 % 43 (45.3 %)

1962* 56.0 % 63 (66.3 %) - - 42.0 % 31 (32.6 %)

1966** 47.2 % 50 (46.3 %) - - 41.0 % 56 (51.9 %)

1970 45.4 % 72 (66.7 %) 23.1 % 7 (6.5 %) 19.6 % 17 (15.7 %) 11.2 % 12 (11.1 %)

1973 54.7 % 102 (92.7 %) 30.2 % 6 (5.5 %) 5 % 0 9.9 % 2 (1.8 %)

1976*** 33.8 % 26 (23.6 %) 41.4 % 71 (64.5 %) 18.2 % 11 (10.0 %) 4.5 % 1 (0.9 %)

1981 46.0 % 42 (34.4 %) 49.3 % 80 (65.6 %) --

1985 56.0 % 99 (81.1 %) 38.7 % 23 (18.9 %) - -

EQUALITY PARTY

1989 49.9 % 92 (73.6 %) 40.2 % 29 (23.2 %) 3.7 % 4 (3.2 %)

ACTION DÉMOCRATIQUE

1994 44.4 % 47 (37.6 %) 44.8 % 77 (61.6 %) 6.5 % 1 (0.8 %)

1998 43.6 % 48 (38.4 %) 42.9 % 76 (60.8 %) 11.8 % 1 (0.8 %)

2003 45.9 % 76 (60.8 %) 33.2 % 45 (36.0 %) 18.2 % 4 (3.2 %)

* 1960 and 1962: One independent member was elected. ** 1966: Two independent members were elected. In addition, the Rassemblement pour l’indépendance nationale and the Ralliement national obtained 5.6% and 3.2% of the votes, respectively, without having any candidates elected. *** 1976: One member from the Parti national populaire was elected.

Bold characters highlight the highest percentages of votes and seats obtained in each of the elections. In 1966 and 1998, the party that obtained the highest percentage of votes was not the party that obtained the most seats.

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM: YOUR OPINION COUNTS! 29

Printing completed November 2005 Imprimerie Transcontinental Québec