Electoral Systems in Canada Notes

Electoral Systems in Canada

Electoral systems are the rules that convert individual preferences for political representation into actual representation.
Key questions guiding electoral systems:
a) Whose preferences count? (The franchise)
b) How many areas are established for representation, and how many representatives exist per area?
c) How are contests for representation organized?

The franchise in Canada has gradually expanded to include more diverse groups.
Canada typically has one representative (Member of the House of Commons, HoC) for each riding, leading to a proportional structure.
Seat Formula: 338 total HoC seats, derived from population divisions.
- Total Provincial Populations / 279 (the electoral quotient) determines seats per province.
- No province can have fewer seats than it did in 1976, maintaining a form of representation.

The Electoral Ridings Readjustment Act (1995) governs the adjustment of ridings.
This act is critical for determining who wins seats in each riding and thus the overall composition of representatives in parliament.

Plurality: Winner only needs more votes than others, not a majority (e.g., if A gets 51%, B gets 24%, C gets 25%).
Majority: Winner must receive more than 50% plus one of the votes.
Example comparison:
- A (51%), B (24%), C (25%) - majority for A
- A (35%), B (33%), C (32%) - no majority winner; plurality system applies.

Characteristics of SMP:
1. Wasted votes: A candidate can win with a minority of the votes (e.g., A wins with 35% while 65% did not choose them).
2. Potential for manufactured majorities, leading to hidden party advantages.
3. Tendency to promote regionalism, as exemplified by the Bloc Québécois’s performance over years despite fluctuating national support.

Bloc Québécois (BQ) cases illustrate effective regionalism:
- BQ demonstrated varying HoC seat allocations with a consistently lower national vote percentage.
NDP's Electoral Challenges:
- Faced a similar pattern of under-representation despite increasing national votes, revealing vulnerabilities in SMP where concentrated support leads to disproportionate seat counts.

The Canada Elections Act (s313) allows for variations in determining winners post-verification, raising questions on methodology (plurality, majority, etc.).

Potential exists to blend plurality with majority systems (e.g., requiring runoffs if no majority is reached).

Voters select one candidate; if no candidate receives over 50%, a runoff occurs between the top two candidates.
- Affects voter turnout in non-general elections.

Voters rank candidates by preference.
If no candidate wins a majority of first-choice votes, the candidate with the lowest votes is eliminated and their votes redistributed until a majority is found.
- Encourages strategic voting, as voters can express preferences without fear of 'wasting' votes on unpopular candidates.

Aims to align the vote-to-seat ratio, allowing parties to receive seats commensurate with the percentage of votes received (e.g., 50% of votes equals 50% of seats).

STV calculates the 'Droop quota' to determine how many votes a candidate needs to win.
Example calculation: if there are 100 valid votes and 3 candidates, the magic number is calculated as (total votes / candidates) + 1, leading to the distribution of surplus votes until all seats are filled.

Various Canadian cities have trialed alternative electoral systems:
- STV used in Calgary (1916-1961) and Winnipeg (1920-1971).
- AV also adopted in Alberta for rural voting, ensuring fair representation for underrepresented groups.

Two main limitations to reform:
1. Political gatekeeping by established parties to maintain power.
2. Electoral reform is typically addressed under political stress or during specific governmental crises, leading to temporary discussions without substantial action.