Reinventing Parliament (or the Legislature): Why we need a new voting system Prepared by Wendy Bergerud November 2014 (with some slides from Tony Hodgson, FVBC)

How did I get into this? Like most people I have been unhappy with the way our political system seems to work. For instance: –How can 40% of the popular vote give a party a majority of seats and hence a majority government? –Why does the power seem to be getting more and more centralized in the PM or premiers’ offices? 2

3 Then I got this letter! (in 2003)

BCCAER Mission: Look at Voting Systems and decide if a change should be considered.

5 Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform Learning Phase: Jan to Mar 2004 Public Hearings: Apr to Jun 2004 –50 held throughout the province –Summary meeting June 2004 in Prince George. Submissions: until mid August 2004 –Received 1603! Deliberation Phase: Sept to Dec 2004

Photo by Kent Kallberg

The Assembly’s Three Key Values Fairness – parties’ share of seats in the Legislature mirrors their share of votes Local representation – communities and regions are well represented Voter choice – voters have more choice not only between candidates but also between parties

8 Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform Recommended a voting system by 146 to 7 First Referendum in May 2005 –Passed in 77 of 79 ridings –“Only” 57.8% overall support Electoral Boundaries Commission drew both sets of boundaries for 2009 election. Second Referendum in May 2009 with differently worded question. –Passed in 8 of 85 ridings with 39% overall support.

Who can change the Voting system? Voting Systems can be changed by the legislature or the parliament. The constitution does NOT need to be changed. There is no legal requirement for a citizens’ assembly or a referendum. 9

Electoral Reform needs to become an “obvious” change. Some of the groups working on this: –Fair Vote Canada Local chapter has a facebook site. –Fair Voting BC –LeadNow –Cooperate for Canada –And many others. 10

11 What is an electoral (voting) system? This is the system of rules and methods by which citizens’ votes are translated into seats in our legislature. Our current system uses single member ridings, that is, one MLA or MP is elected from each riding or district. That member is the one candidate who received the MOST votes (a plurality), not necessarily a majority of the votes cast.

12 Our current SMP (FPTP) system Our current system divides the province into ridings/constituencies/electoral districts (ED’s) with approximately equal numbers of people in each. Boundary commissions try to maintain whole communities within each ED Candidates for MLA or MP are listed on a ballot and voters choose just one name. The candidate with the “most” votes “wins”.

SMP (FPTP) Ridings

First Past The Post

Two Main Parties False Majorities Strategic Voting Neglected Minorities FPTP (First Past the Post) BC and Canada’s Current Voting System Elected Candidates Voters are divided into small ridings based on where they live. Colours indicate party or group preference.

16 Local Representation As Elections BC notes in their publication “Think, Choose, Vote”: “While a general election can seem like one election, it is actually many separate elections happening at the same time.” (Teacher backgrounder, page 5)

17 Local Representation This system fundamentally “defines” our interests by where we live; it is assumed that we share our values and interests with our physical neighbours. This may have worked back in the 1800’s when a small group of landowners within “riding distance” would get together and decide who to send off to the far away legislature to represent their (similar) interests.

18 Local Representation But it doesn’t work anymore: –System hasn’t adapted as more groups were enfranchised (e.g. Women, Asians, Aboriginal, Indo-Canadians, etc.) –Many “communities of interest” are now spatially diffuse and unable to get reasonable representation – they must be spatially congregated enough within an ED to get representation.

19 Local Representation

20 Local Representation /WhitePaper.pdf

21 Local Representation “... It is important that each MLA represent roughly similar numbers of eligible voters so that a majority of MLAs actually represent a majority of the population....” !!!

22 Local Representation

23 Using our voting system to reflect the will of the electorate is like using a funhouse mirror to reflect your image. Why change?

24 Should we change it? Our current voting systems seems simple: – The ballot is easy to use – Counting the votes is relatively easy: just figure out who got the most votes BUT – The outcomes are anything but simple to explain!

25 Outcomes are erratic Let’s look at the results of three provincial elections: –In 2005, the Liberals got a majority government with just 45% of the vote. –In 2001, the Liberals got 97% of the seats with only 58% of the popular vote. The Green Party got no seats with 12%. –In 1996, the NDP formed gov’t even though they got less of the popular vote than the Liberals.

NDP Support Almost Constant yet outcome unrelated YearLiberalsNDPGreen 19867%43% 0.2% %41%1% %39%2% %22%12% %42%9% %42%8% %40%8% 26

Political Catalyst For Reform NDP comes 2nd yet wins a majority of the seats Liberal leader Gordon Campbell adopts electoral reform as a campaign policy

Solid Wins Become Blowouts

29 Ineffective Votes (wasted votes) Many of our votes don’t help elect an MLA (about half of us!) This results in distorted party results Discourages voters Far more votes will help elect an MLA with a proportional voting system.

30 Are Regions different? Differences between regions exaggerated: Vancouver Island looks NDP while Okanagan looks Liberal (only 50% vote Liberal!) Parties emphasize “swing” ridings during elections - their “safe” seats tend to be neglected during the campaign. Areas of support often “rewarded” during party’s term of office.

31 North of the Malahat (2005)

32 Okanagan (2005)

Local Distortions BC 2005 Election Reasonably similar popular vote, but radically different outcomes.

Nobody Won! 2005 Election

Pop Quiz

Since 1952, 16 of the 17 BC elections have produced majority governments. How many times has the leading party won 50% or more of the popular vote? 1.All the time – you can’t win a majority without getting 50% of the vote 2.10 times 3.5 times 4.3 times 5.Once

Over four successive elections between 1983 and 1996, a BC party steadily lost popular support: 45%, 43%, 41%, 39% (less than opposition). Which of the following best describes how many seats that party won? 1.45, 43, 41, 39% - seats won always correspond to votes won 2.51, 45, 34, 25% - steady drop 3.68, 52, 39, 32% - steady drop 4.52, 68, 32, 39% - bounced up and down, but trended down 5.39, 32, 68, 52% - lost first two elections, ended up with majorities

In the 2005 BC election, what was the smallest fraction of the vote that a winning candidate received? % – you always need majority support % % % %

40 Majority Governments? A “majority” government should represent a majority of its citizens. We commonly get one-party majority governments with less than 50% support While “stable” during their term, long-term stability is missing as we lurch from one ruling party to another. In the last 16 BC elections we’ve had only one “true” majority government (2001).

41 Minority/Coalition Gov’ts Minority or coalition governments are more likely with a proportional voting system. Parties more likely to form coalitions that represent a majority of the voters. Small changes in voting patterns won’t change results much so parties will have to work together ==> Policy changes will be more stable over the long-term.

What are the alternatives? PR voting systems provide a better match between how people vote and the final outcome. Three main families: 1.PR-List – vote for parties with candidate lists 2.MMP – a mixture of SMP and PR-list 3.STV – a variety of PR-list where voters rank the candidates on the party lists and can cross party lines when doing so.

Electoral systems

Main Features of a PR system MUST have multi-member districts! STV uses ranked ballots in multi-member districts. The “list” in MMP is actually a multi- member riding. Each list belongs to a multi-member riding. MMP also uses single member ridings. PR-list only uses multi-member ridings.

Main Features of a PR system PR systems can be designed with “tiers”. STV and FPTP are one tier systems. MMP is a two tier system: one tier of single member ridings and at least one tier that combines some or all of the single member ridings for the list(s). PR-list is often designed with tiers so that the lower tier ridings can be smaller, while the upper tier ridings help smooth out the overall proportionality of the results.

Voters How Do Such Weird Results Happen?

Voting With Single Member Plurality

Popular Vote vs Seats - SMP

Proportional Representation

Popular Vote vs Seats - PR

STV: Popular Vote vs Seats

Websites Fair Vote Canada: Resources at: Fair Voting BC: fairvotingbc.com Elections BC: Voting Counts: Electoral Reform for Canada: content/uploads/2013/06/Law-Commission-of- Canada-Report.pdf

55