Single Vote Proportional Proposal for a New Election System for Canada by Rick Ingram Canada’s current election system is based on 338 electoral districts (more commonly known as ridings) with the elected candidate for each riding being the one who receives the most votes; this system is known as first-past-the-post. This document outlines an alternative system called Single Vote Proportional. It is a hybrid with characteristics of first-past-the-post, single transferable vote and mixed-member proportional. All election systems have advantages and disadvantages. Proponents of electoral reform (including this author) find the disadvantages of first-past-the-post to be so overwhelming that there is an absolute need to introduce a replacement system. The problem has been finding a replacement system whose own disadvantages have not generated strong enough opposition to leave us with the status quo. Single Vote Proportional addresses the primary disadvantages of the 3 other main election systems. The significant advantages of Single Vote Proportional far outweigh its own disadvantages and make it a viable alternative to the clearly broken current system of first-past-the-post. Single Vote: One voter -> one vote -> one candidate For voters, no change from the current ballot or process Local Representation: 90% of the MPs are riding or regional representatives Every riding has a Riding Seat MP or a Regional Seat MP Only 10% of the seats are for national Balancing Seat MPs Inclusive: Every vote counts - and will be considered until the last seat is assigned First at the Riding level, then at the Regional level, and finally for national Balancing Seats Proportional: Provides an equitable seat distribution Maximum deviation for any party from actual proportional seat share: 2015 – 0.3% (actual election deviation - 14.9%), 2011 – 0.8% (14.3%) 2008 – 1.8% (8.7%), 2006 – 0.2% (8.1%), 2004 – 1.3% (9.5%) Single Vote Proportional, v1.0.1 © 2017 Richard Ingram Page 1 of 79 Discussion of Main Election Systems Single Single Mixed- First-Past- System Characteristic Vote Transferable Member the-Post Proportional Vote Proportional Ballot complexity simple simple complex moderate Voting system complexity moderate simple complex moderate Ratio of local seats to balancing seats 90 : 10 100 : 0 100 : 0 50 : 50 moderate moderate Degree of inclusivity high low 1st choice - med. ridings - low any choice - high balancing - high Ratio of voter selected MPs to 100 : 0 100 : 0 100 : 0 50 : 50 MPs appointed by political parties National proportional balance yes no moderate yes based on voters’ first choice of party First-Past-the-Post Overview First-past-the-post is the current system used in Canada federally and in all provinces. The essentials of the system are: the country is divided into electoral districts (ridings) one Member of Parliament is selected from each riding constituents of the riding vote for the candidate of their choice (one only) within the riding in each of the ridings, the candidate that receives the most votes wins the seat for the riding Single Vote Proportional, v1.0.1 © 2017 Richard Ingram Page 2 of 79 Advantages Simple Ballot Each eligible Canadian voter is entitled to a single, simple vote to be cast for the candidate of their choice in their riding. Simple Vote Counting Vote counting is simply the summing of all votes for specific candidates, first at the polling station and then summing the polling stations for riding counts. High Local Representation As there is a one to one relationship between Members of Parliament and ridings, this system provides the highest possible degree of local representation. Disadvantages Non-proportional Although mathematically possible to have the distribution of seats closely match the popular vote, it is highly unlikely. Review of past elections shows a consistent tendency for a large imbalance, ranging from 8.7% – 14.9% maximum deviation for any party in the past 5 elections. Non-representative at the local level As the only requirement is for a candidate to have the most votes in a riding to win, there is a high risk that a candidate will win a riding with a low percentage of the riding vote. Analysis of the 2015 election data shows that seats were won with a range of 28.64 - 81.8% of the riding vote. Further, only 48 of 338 seats were won with a super-majority of 60% or higher, and 206 ridings were won with less than 50% of the riding vote. Non-representative at the national level The above disadvantages can lead to a party winning a majority government (and hence having 100% of power) with less than 50% of the popular vote. Since World War 1 we have had 17 majority federal governments in Canada, in only 4 of those did the winning party have greater than 50% of the popular vote. In fact, with first-past-the-post, it is possible for a party to have a majority government while another party has a larger share of the popular vote. Single Vote Proportional, v1.0.1 © 2017 Richard Ingram Page 3 of 79 Non-inclusive With first-past-the-post all votes not cast for the winning candidate in a riding are discarded. This leads to two issues. First, frustration felt by supporters of non-winning candidates who feel that their vote was wasted. Second, when there is a clear preferred candidate in a riding then supporters of other parties can be discouraged from voting, feeling that their time would be wasted casting a useless vote. Single Transferable Vote Overview The essentials of the Single Transferable Vote system are: the country is divided into regions each region is allocated some number of Members of Parliament; each party is allowed to run one candidate for each available seat in the region constituents of the region cast a ballot on which they rank their favourite candidates; the number they are allowed to rank is dependent on country specific STV implementation the number of votes required to win a seat is region dependent and based on the number of seats in the region; if there are 3 seats then ¼ + 1 of the region votes are needed, if 5 seats are available then 1/6 + 1, if 9 are available then 1/10 + 1, etc. all candidates with the required number of votes are awarded a seat; their vote count is reduced by the required votes; any excess votes are distributed proportionately to the next preferred candidate; if this transfer places any new candidates over the required number of votes then they are awarded a seat and their excess votes distributed when excess redistribution fails to bring any candidates over the required count, then the votes from the candidate with the least votes are redistributed to their next choice this cycle is continued until all seats are assigned Advantages High Local Representation Although not as high as first-past-the-post, as each region in Single Transferable Vote elects a limited number of Members of Parliament, this system provides an extremely high degree of local representation. Single Vote Proportional, v1.0.1 © 2017 Richard Ingram Page 4 of 79 Somewhat Inclusive Voters for parties that receive a small portion of the region vote will have that vote of first choice discarded and in that sense Single Transferable Vote is non-inclusive. However, the ranked ballot process generally allows voters to rank their preference for about 6 of the candidates in the region. It may be the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th ranked candidate that the vote is applied to a candidate who may actually win a seat. In this sense Single Transferable Vote is somewhat inclusive. Some proportional balance improvement Single Transferable Vote achieves an improvement in first choice proportional balance over first- past-the-post but the extent is limited by the number of MPs in a region. As this is typically restricted to about 3, then seats selected with first choices only would see proportional balance for the Liberals and Conservatives improve, for the NDP it would improve somewhat, for the BQ they are as likely to see a drop or an increase as well as an increased potential for an imbalance, and for the Green Party and all smaller parties their proportional under-representation would persist. Disadvantages Complex Ballot STV has a more complex voting process in which voters must make multiple, ranked selections. Complex Vote Tabulating In every riding, every vote must be recorded for multiple priority votes. Errors in which candidates were selected and/or the order of selection can occur. Contrast this to the current simplicity of recording a single vote for each voter, in which errors already occur. Complex New Voting System for Voters to Understand The concept of redistribution of votes based on proportion of next preference can be difficult to explain, and for many it can be difficult to grasp. Further complicating is the fact that redistribution occurs with both excess votes as well as from the candidate with least votes when no candidate has sufficient votes. Single Vote Proportional, v1.0.1 © 2017 Richard Ingram Page 5 of 79 Mixed-Member Proportional Overview The essentials of the Mixed-Member Proportional system are: the country is divided into ridings constituents of the ridings are provided a two section ballot; the first section is to select the candidate of their choice in their riding, and the second is to specify the party of their preference for seat balancing the seats in the ridings are assigned using the first-past-the-post system there is an equal number of balancing seats to ridings seats based on the specified seat distribution among parties from the second part of the ballot, and the actual distribution from the riding seats, balancing seats are awarded one at a time to the party that is furthest from the specified seat share this is repeated until no balancing seats remain Advantages Relatively Simple Ballot Voters have to make two choices.