Making a Recommendation: Stay with FPTP OR Switch to a new system ? Deliberative Phase: Weekend 4

Why would BC even want to change its electoral system?  The electoral system has served the country and province well for its history  Is it broken? Is there a better system?  This requires an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of FPTP in comparison to those of an alternate PR system.  This comparison needs to be defined in terms of basic principles and set in the context of the wider provincial and Canadian system  Mandate says the Assembly’s assessment: “take into account the potential effect of its recommended model on the system of government in British Columbia” so this is assessment must be about more than simply the politics of elections and vote counting

Comparing the known to the unknown  How does FPTP work? What are its weaknesses? (The CA’s raison d’être) What are its obvious strengths?  How might a PR alternative system work? What could be gained? What would be lost by a change?  Could a change address FPTP weaknesses without giving up its strengths? Are the potential gains to be made worth the costs? What considerations lead to your decision?

The Westminster Parliamentary System  Elections choose and determine political shape of Legislatures  Elections don’t choose Governments, Legislatures do  Government policy dependent upon the Legislature’s support  Political parties provide the organizing glue that holds system together and hold governments accountable to the voters Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Political Parties

FPTP as a ‘flawed’ electoral system  The seats in the legislature a party wins does not reflect the votes it receives There can be ‘wrong winners’ The Legislature can have greatly exaggerated majorities  Large parties regularly get more than their share, small ones systematically under-represented  Produces impotent oppositions that can not act as an effective check on governments  Encourages an overly adversarial style of politics  Under-represents women & minority groups

FPTP as a preferred governing system  Encourages broad-based inclusive parties with an incentive to reach out to voters ‘Catch-all’ parties = pre-election coalitions to choose between  Produces Majority Governments (usually) Governments have a mandate for policy & action Such governments can be policy innovators Governments can be held accountable by the voters Government alternation provides a corrective to hyper- stability  Strong governments necessary to defend BC’s interests in the politics of Federal-Provincial policy-making that is at the core of much Canadian government decision-making

The Westminster Parliamentary System - FPTP version Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A A B C

FPTP as a political management tool  Majority governments can plan for life of term and elections can be held at predictable times  Governments can feel free to make unpopular decisions  Parties can not be successful if they represent narrow political interests or one group  Electoral accountability is clear and simple for governments for local representatives rooted in their communities

The PR Alternative: electoral advantages  PR provides for a more representative legislature - parties receive seats in proportion to their votes - all partisan interests are represented in the legislature - there is a greater diversity among members  Does not force small parties to merge their identity / interests into some larger party  Allows for the legislature to play a role in choosing and supervising governments  Can provide for greater electoral choice - more competitors - more and more kinds of choice for individual voters

The PR Alternative: governing issues  No majority government chosen by election so politicians engage in private bargaining after the election to decide among themselves who forms the government  Coalition governments have no natural life and can break-up any time  Voters have no clear idea who to credit or blame for government success or failures. This is accentuated if coalitions change within life of legislature  In Canada, could a coalition Premier speak for her province with confidence in Federal-Provincial arena?

A PR Legislature for BC  What might it look like?  Consider New Zealand’s experience 1) Pre PR: 2 large and 1 small parties It looked like a classic FPTP system and produced successive, and alternating majority governments 2) Post PR: 6 or 7 parties of varying size And the question was – Who governs?

A Transformed Parliamentary System - Proportional version Legislature Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A Party C Party D Party E Party F

Who governs?  In this case, who is to form the government?  What is the basis for their mandate / program?  Who is to lead the government? - not always a party leader  What happens if the government breaks up? An election or another coalition?  It is not clear that the voters get to answer these questions  So “Who is on first” anyway?

Coalition of the Left ? Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A Party C Party D Party E Party F Coalition

Coalition of the Right ? Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A Party C Party D Party E Party F Coalition

Coalition(s) of the Centre ? Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A Party C Party D Party E Party F Coalition

Coalition of the Willing ? Legislature Election Process Government (Cabinet) Party B Party A Party C Party D Party E Party F Coalition

Coalitions  In Proportional systems key political conflicts are worked out by politicians in the legislature as well as by voters at the ballot box  There is a range of coalition possibilities but some are obviously more plausible than others  Coalition systems can provide voters with choice of governments before the election Parties only need declare their preferred coalition partners, and campaign on joint platforms  The legislature can keep the government in check giving MLAs a significant opportunity to pay a role in government decision-making

FPTP or PR  PR systems speak directly to representational concerns  FPTP combines traditional concerns for geographic linkages with the concern for strong majority government  The legislature sits in the middle of this electoral – government tension, balancing voters against governors  FPTP does this by allowing the government to control the legislature and then answering for its record in elections  PR offers the prospect of changing that essential dynamic, making the legislature more central but leaving elections as reflections of voters’ preferences rather than instruments of government choice

What to conclude ?  There is no right or wrong answer  There are only difficult trade-offs to be made  Are FPTP’s limitations so great it needs to be abandoned?  Is there an alternative that could better serve British Columbia’s future? Is there a principled basis for choosing that alternative?  Is the Assembly confident that it can recommend its alternative system to its fellow citizens?