Source: http://docplayer.net/30032537-Proportional-representation.html
Timestamp: 2019-01-24 03:39:34
Document Index: 355060196

Matched Legal Cases: ['arty 30', 'arty 16', 'arty 8', 'arty 11', 'arty 6', 'arty 20']

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION - PDF
Download "PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION"
1 PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION Library of Parliament Topical Information for Parliamentarians TIPS-120E What Is Proportional Representation? Proportional representation (PR) is a system of parliamentary representation in which the number of seats each party has in the House of Commons is in proportion to its share of the popular vote. There are several types of proportional representation voting systems (see Table 1). Currently, Canada has a firstpast-the-post (FPTP) system, also known as a single-member plurality system. To win a seat in the House of Commons, a candidate must receive the most votes in an electoral district, but he or she does not need to get more than 50% of the vote (an absolute majority). Indeed, in the 2004 general election, only 134 of the winning 308 candidates (43.5%) received an absolute majority of votes in their ridings. What Are the Problems With the Current System? The main criticism of Canada s FPTP system is that a party s share of the national vote is not necessarily reflected in its share of parliamentary seats. Some parties receive a greater share of seats than their share of the vote, while some receive a lesser share. As shown in Table 2, in the five general elections between 1988 and 2004, the governing party received less than half the popular vote, but in four cases an absolute majority of the seats in the House of Commons. At the same time, opposition parties with support that was widely spread across the country such as the NDP, and the Progressive Conservative Party since 1993 were under-represented in Parliament. (The most extreme example was in 1993, when the Progressive Conservatives received 16% of the vote, but only 2 seats (0.7% of the total).) On the other hand, the percentage of seats won by regionally based parties such as the Bloc Québécois was closer to its percentage of the popular vote. Although the 2004 election produced results that were somewhat more proportional than past elections, parties such as the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois were rewarded by the FPTP system, while the NDP was penalized. 5 July 2004 Critics of the current system also argue that, in addition to producing disproportionate results, it results in the under-representation of women, minority groups and Aboriginal peoples, and that there is less diversity in the House of Commons than in Canadian society at large. Furthermore, many argue that the FPTP system disregards a large number of votes. Voters who did not support the winning candidate in their riding may feel as though their votes did not matter and may be discouraged from voting. What Forms of Proportional Representation Have Been Proposed for Canada? In 2004, the Law Commission of Canada issued a report entitled Voting Counts: Electoral Reform for Canada, in which it proposed a mixed member proportional electoral system based on the Scottish system. Under this proposal, two-thirds of the members of the House of Commons would be elected in constituency races using the first-past-the-post method, and the remaining one-third would be elected from provincial or territorial party lists. In addition, one list seat each would be allotted to Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, and Yukon. To distribute the seats, the total number of votes cast for a party list in a province would be divided by the number of constituencies won by that party, plus one. The plus one would ensure that parties that did not win a constituency seat would still be eligible for a list seat. (1) Meanwhile, a number of provinces are reviewing their electoral systems and are considering proportional representation as an option for reform. In addition, several public interest groups promote proportional representation. They include Fair Vote Canada, Mouvement pour une démocratie nouvelle, Equal Voice, and Fair Voting BC. This is the paper version of a Web document which is available on-line at
2 LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT BIBLIOTHÈQUE DU PARLEMENT 2 In 1979, the Task Force on Canadian Unity (the Pepin-Robarts Task Force) proposed a mixed member proportional system based on the German model. It proposed adding 60 seats to the House of Commons (then 282 seats), with the additional seats allocated to parties on the basis of their national vote, and then distributed among the provinces. The Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada (the Macdonald Commission), on the other hand, was skeptical about the introduction of proportional representation for the House of Commons. In its 1985 report, it judged that a mixed member proportional system would be too expensive and complicated, and raised questions about creating two classes of MPs. The 1991 report of the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform (the Lortie Commission) did not recommend changing the current system. Proportional representation systems have also been proposed by academics. (An overview of these proposals is included in a paper by F. Leslie Seidle entitled Electoral System Reform in Canada: Objectives, Advocacy and Implications for Governance. ) In addition to variants of the mixed member proportional system, there have been proposals for a single transferable vote system and a mixed system under which 20% of seats would be allocated to parties according to their regional vote shares for the first-past-the-post seats. (There have also been proposals for an alternative vote system. Voters rank-order candidates, and the lowest-ranked candidates are dropped and their votes redistributed until one candidate has a majority. This, however, is not a proportional system, but a plurality-majority system that is slightly different from Canada s current system.) What Could Be the Impact on Parliament? Adding an element of proportionality to Canada s electoral system would have significant implications for Parliament. Some of these might be: A more representative Parliament. The number of seats won by political parties would more closely match their electoral support. More, smaller parties. Because the threshold for admission for new parties would be lower, movements such as the Greens might have a better chance at winning seats. Indeed, more parties are represented in the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales under proportional representation than there were under their previous first-past-the-post systems. Fewer, larger constituencies. Under the proposed mixed member proportional systems, there would be fewer constituency MPs. Constituencies would therefore be larger. Changed roles for MPs. Some observers are concerned that, if there were two classes of MPs constituency MPs and list MPs list MPs would have a lower status. The list MPs would likely have a lighter constituency workload and be able to devote more time to policy issues. However, the experience in Germany and New Zealand suggests that there would be little tension between the two types of MPs. Less regional polarization. Party caucuses would be more likely to include representatives from most major provinces. More coalition cabinets. Single-party majority governments would likely become the exception. If the experience of proportional representation in other countries is anything to go by, coalition cabinets would be more frequent than minority governments. At the same time, cabinets would tend to be less durable. Weaker prime ministers. Coalition cabinets would likely limit the ability of the prime minister to act independently. More powerful committees. In both the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly, committees have played a greater role, both in scrutiny and policy formation. They have been no less partisan, however. What Could Be the Effect on the Representation of Women and Minorities? Although proportional representation voting systems tend to improve the chances of women and members of minority groups being elected, the electoral system is not the only factor involved. Their level of representation also depends on the policies of political parties, because the parties would continue to nominate the candidates for both the constituency and list seats.
3 LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT BIBLIOTHÈQUE DU PARLEMENT 3 The Law Commission of Canada addressed this problem by recommending that Parliament require political parties to develop initiatives and policies to promote equal representation of women and greater representation of minority group members and Aboriginal people. In addition, it recommended that the federal government, in consultation with First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples, explore the possibility of introducing Aboriginal Electoral Districts. What Could Be the Effect on Voter Turnout? Proponents of proportional representation argue that it would lead to higher voter turnout. It remains unclear whether this would be the case, however. A study of the experience with proportional representation in Scotland and Wales found the impact of new electoral systems upon turnout was unproven. In addition, it should be noted that according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), voter turnout around the world has been in decline since the mid-1980s. It is likely that other factors such as attitudes towards the parliamentary process (particularly among younger voters) or the closeness of the electoral race contribute to turnout rates. What Are Some of the Concerns About Proportional Representation? One of the main criticisms of proportional representation systems is that they tend to produce minority and coalition governments. These governments are far less durable than majority governments because they rely on consensus to pass legislation. Although proponents of proportional representation argue this could lead to less adversarial-style politics, it could also result in small or fringe parties holding the balance of power in Parliament. Under certain proportional representation systems, such as mixed member proportional systems, the size of constituencies would likely increase substantially. Larger ridings would not only have larger populations but also, in many cases, cover more territory. Members of the House of Commons repeatedly emphasize the budgetary and time constraints they face, and larger ridings, even with the possibility of an additional list MP, would not likely be a welcome change. Notes (1) For further explanation of mixed member proportional systems, see the Law Commission of Canada, Voting Counts: Electoral Reform for Canada, Ottawa, 2004, pp prepared by Michael Dewing Megan Furi Parliamentary Information and Research Service For more information Please see the bibliography as well as the internal and external links of the Web version of this document at: or dial (613)
4 List-PR TABLE 1 Proportional Representation Electoral Systems System Operation Where Used Single Transferable Vote Mixed Member Proportional Single Non- Transferable Vote Parallel or Mixed Member Majoritarian Proportional Representation (PR) Systems Voters vote for a party, each of which presents a list of candidates. Voters rank-order candidates in multimember districts. Voters vote twice: once for a constituency MP who is elected by the first-past-the-post method and once for a party, which presents a list of candidates. The party s share of seats is determined by the party s share of the vote, and the number of constituency seats is subtracted from this total. Semi-Proportional Representation Systems Voters vote for one candidate in multiple-seat districts. Candidates with the highest vote totals win. Voters vote for a constituency MP and for a party, which presents a list of candidates. Unlike the mixed member proportional system, however, these systems do not compensate for any disproportionality within the constituencies. Most European democracies Ireland, Malta, Australian Senate Germany, Scotland, Wales, New Zealand Jordan, Vanuatu, Taiwan Source: Law Commission of Canada, Voting Counts: Electoral Reform for Canada. Japan, Russia, South Korea
5 TABLE 2 Discrepancy Between the Percentage of Popular Vote and Percentage of Parliamentary Seats Party Percentage of Popular Vote Elected Members Percentage of Parliamentary Seats General Election of 28 June 2004 Liberal 37% % Conservative Party 30% % Bloc Québécois 12% % New Democratic Party 16% % Other 4% 1 0.3% Total 100% % General Election of 27 November 2000 Liberal 40.8% % Canadian Alliance 25.5% % Bloc Québécois 10.7% % New Democratic Party 8.5% % Progressive Conservative 12.2% % Other 2.3% 0 0% Total 100% % General Election of 2 June 1997 Liberal 38.5% % Reform 19.4% % Bloc Québécois 10.7% % New Democratic Party 11.0% % Progressive Conservative 18.8% % Other 1.6% 1 0.3% Total 100% % General Election of 25 November 1993 Liberal 41.3% % Bloc Québécois 13.5% % Reform 18.7% % New Democratic Party 6.9% 9 3.1% Progressive Conservative 16.0% 2 0.7% Other 3.6% 1 0.3% Total 100% % General Election of 21 November 1988 Progressive Conservative 43.0% % Liberal 31.9% % New Democratic Party 20.4% % Other 4.7% 0 0% Total 100% % Source: Library of Parliament, Electoral Results by Party,
The Electoral System of Canada. 4th Edition
The Electoral System of Canada 4th Edition For enquiries, please contact: Public Enquiries Unit Elections Canada 30 Victoria Street Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0M6 Tel.: 1-800-463-6868 Fax: 1-888-524-1444 (toll-free)
Choosing an Electoral System Prepared for the British Academy by Simon Hix, Ron Johnston FBA and Iain McLean FBA with research assistance from Angela Cummine 1 THE INTERFACE BETWEEN SCIENCE AND POLICY
Everywhere I go, all over the country, Canadians tell me they want change real change.
Everywhere I go, all over the country, Canadians tell me they want change real change. That means doing different things, but it also means doing things differently. After a decade of Stephen Harper, Canadians
Internal Organization of the Legislative Branch
Internal Organization of the Legislative Branch Legislatures serve three functions to varying degrees; they are: 1) lawmaking; 2) oversight; and 3) representation. How these functions are operationalized
Variation in Turnout By Alberta Electoral Division
Variation in Turnout By Alberta Electoral Division 2008 report September 2008 460, 10055 106 St, Edmonton, Alberta T5J 2Y2 Tel: 780.423.0708 Fax: 780.425.0400 www.legermarketing.com 1. Background and Introduction