Chris Selley: Die Wahlreform erhebt erneut ihr Haupt. Dieses Mal sollten wir es begrüßen: Jeder, der an etwas halbwegs Mutiges oder Außergewöhnliches glaubt, sollte über die Verhältniswahl sprechen
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/selley-electoral-reform-rears-its-head-again-this-time-we-should-welcome-it
13 Kommentare
I like my local MP. Can’t we rank ballot. It gives people better representation as well as keeping a local MP.
The party that commits to implementing this is the party that will get my next vote. Regardless of orientation.
Trudeau’s half-assed attempt to reform really left a bad taste in my mouth. He made overtures toward fair vote Canada suggesting he was open to proportional, when in reality he was stacking the deck toward ranked ballot. When his commission and popular sentiment didn’t go in the direction he wanted, he picked up the puck and went home. Not a good look.
YES
We absolutely need Proportional Representation *now.*
It is the single biggest reform we can make to make our democracy stronger, and more resilient to attack. It will end Canada’s own „Electoral College“ FPTP problems and yeild more accurate results. The end of strategic voting, and wasted votes. And there are many systems which maintain strong local representation as well.
Do not vote for any party or candidate which does not commit to implementing proportional representation.
Dual member proportional. The fact it gives each riding a Government and Opposition Rep (in most ridings) and solves proportional representation without complicating the ballot is ideal. It’s the most harmonious system for Canada because it was designed in Canada. Canada’s system must keep a legitimate and healthy relationship between Government and Loyal Opposition, while solving the proportional needs and ideally keeping one person, one vote (make a decision). The downside is some ridings become massive, but honestly, in Canada, that can be designed around and making sure the hinterland where so much of the wealth of Canada comes from is well represented in a non extractive way is another feature not a bug.
DMP is the best for Canada cause it was designed in Canada for Canada, yet you rarely hear about it.
For our system, I’d say the best PR model would probably be either Ireland’s or New Zealand’s. Additionally, if we end up having to re-open the constitution to enact electoral reform, we should implement the Triple Senate reforms preposed in the Charlottetown Accord etc. (the Senate becomes elected rather than federally appointed and it’s power to defeat legislation is removed & replaced with a veto)
I’ve always thought we would end up with more parties on the left and right with a different system
We’d probably never see a majority government again which in my opinion is fine
I’m just finishing up the publication of a book on electoral reform (before you ask, no, I never intend to make that money back). One of the most comprehensive surveys of what Canadians want out of electoral reform was done by the Broadbent Institute in 2015. It noted that the single largest group of electoral reform supporters wanted only minor changes. The Broadbent Institute interpreted the results to mean a majority want electoral reform (which is an accurate reading) but its equally true that if ‚minor change‘ reformers and ’no change‘ supporters vote together it also gives a majority. Likewise, when they asked what aspects of electoral reform Canadians valued the first three favoured FPTP but the next six favoured PR (in order of popularity). This isn’t an easy circle to square. I believe my proposal would work as a compromise that both FPTP and PR supporters can live with.
Currently, the plan is to head to Ottawa in the Spring and hand deliver a copy of my proposal to each MP of the Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, and Greens.
You’d have to spend millions on education so Canadians understand. What happened with Trudeau is a clear example. The found it….unproductive. the people didn’t know what he was talking about.
What would this really accomplish in Canada? We already had a supply and confidence deal between the LPC and NDP that extended a minority government to close to a majority term. Is the idea that NDP supporters could have more comfort voting their conscience? Because I don’t see the NDP or any of the other left leaning parties abandoning their “firewall” around cooperation with the CPC. This isn’t even a knock on Canadian democracy similar firewalls exist in many Western countries.
Just keep in mind, Israel has Proportional Representation.
There is no perfect electoral model. They all have their good elements, and they all have their downfalls. At the end of the day, democracy is only as strong as the people that ACTIVELY participate in it EVERY DAMNED DAY!
We can have PR but it won’t make us better represented UNLESS YOU support the people YOU WANT to represent you.
PR, MMPR, FPTP, STV, it doesn’t matter what we have, NONE of these PREVENT authoritarianism, nor do they ensure meritocracy.
If you want better representatives in Parliament that work for you, then you have to do the work. Relying on a voting system to „fix things“ is simplistic and naïve.
It’s certainly one of the possible reforms.
Chris Selley’s take is an important reminder of one of the trade offs of PR: it introduces incentives for extreme parties to push ever morw extremism at a fast pace.
The alternative of ranked ballot has the benefit of offering a hedge against the race to the extreme that characterises large chunks of PR electoral dynamics.
Still PR might do better than FPTP, which invites minority majority rule, and its moderating dynamics of requiring large coalations is undermined by the narrow choices when the electorate needs to toss a government for misbehaviour, allowing extremists to play the odds on moving further to extremes when opponents flounder. But ranked ballot does it somewhat better.
My other big problem is that PR makes the party leadership even more powerful, narrowing perspectives and voices in parliament.
This isnt to say dont do PR – but its important to remember that like all systems it has its drawbacks.
I’d personally prefer a 50/50 split of ranked ballot local and PR at large members, but Canadian voters balk at anything more complicated than checlmark next to name, so its though.
One compromise I strongly dislike is MMPR, which trades out a lot of advantages of PR without much payoff.
> “under my leadership, the next time the NDP holds the balance of power in parliament, we’ll have one demand: proportional representation.”
And that would make them irrelevant. Singh brought up electoral reform with Trudeau as something that he wanted in the supply and confidence deal. Trudeau shot that down, Singh was smart, and didn’t make the perfect the enemy of the good, and dropped the matter. If Lewis wants to ensure that the NDP gets no promises for anything in a minority government, that’s how you do it.
> It would be a much more compelling case if any great number of Canadians had any demonstrated tendency toward extremism, which they do not.
Umm, has Selley forgotten about the PPC, or the Maple MAGA types in the CPC? Extremism may not be as prevalent here as in other countries, but we’ve got more than enough of it to still need to push back against it, rather than help it.
Nah… We have a hard enough time getting anything done in this country without turning the House of Commons into an Italian Parliament.