Why Proportional Representation is the Change We Need (and why we are never gonna get it from the other guys).
A couple days ago I was forwarded an email coming from hereditary incumbent Ben Carr warning his membership about the big bad NDP wolf “Splitting the left”. I’m normally not so cheeky on this blog, but… let’s go for it.
“Splitting the left” is a gift you are currently receiving from both Liberal and Conservative governments. It keeps those of us left of center out of their comfort zone. There are many reasons why this is terrible for democracy but maintaining the status quo is one of them. I'd venture to say their foot dragging on making this change is intentional; it unfairly benefits both “major” parties and keeps their incumbents in. (even the hereditary ones)
Trudeau campaigned on electoral reform, he promised to abolish “first past the post” in his first term and then he never had time in a decade to get back to it. I don’t see Mark Carney getting into it and I very much doubt Ben Carr would support it. I’ll take license to repeat myself here “splitting the left” is a Liberal and conservative legacy. So let’s not get baited into voting for a more conservative Canada - Both with the reds and the blues - and get people who will push for electoral reform into government. I’ll advance one more thought on what Ben is calling “The Left” Mark Carney is the most conservative liberal I can think of and that leaves a LOT of left for the NDP to take. Don’t get me wrong I shiver at the thought of a conservative majority dealing with Trump (barf) in 2025 Canada. But I know we have a lot of room to grow, here is why.
About FPTP
Imagine a Canada where a party wins a "majority" government with only 39 percent of the vote… Actually you don’t have to imagine it—this has happened multiple times. Under our current first-past-the-post (FPTP) system, a party can govern with complete control even when the majority of Canadians did not vote for them.
The consequences are significant. Millions of votes do not count. Strategic voting dominates elections, forcing people to choose between the "lesser evil" rather than a candidate or party they truly believe in. “Smaller” parties with substantial public support are shut out, and diverse voices—especially from underrepresented communities—are drowned out in Parliament. This is not a good democracy.
In a winner-takes-all system where the candidate with the most votes in a riding wins the seat—even if they only got 30 percent of the vote. The remaining 70 percent of voters are left unrepresented. This leads to several fundamental problems. False majorities are common, where parties frequently win majority governments without securing a majority of the popular vote. In 2015, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals won 100 percent of the power with only 39.5 percent of the vote. Yes, keeping conservatives out and while that is really good, millions of votes are wasted, having no impact on the final election results. If a voter supports a candidate who does not win in their riding, their vote essentially disappears. This is why strategic voting becomes the regrettable norm, with many Canadians feeling pressured to vote against the party they fear the most ( the cons) rather than supporting the candidate or party they believe in( the NDP ;) ). The system also exaggerates regional divisions, making it seem like entire provinces support only one party when, in reality, there is significant political diversity.
Canada’s elections should be about representation, not about which party can manipulate the system to win the most seats with the least votes. In Winnipeg South Centre we are a good example of this. The total electorate in Winnipeg South Centre is 70,484 people—about 75% of the population living in the riding. Yet, in the last election, only 25,858 people voted. (Meaning roughly 43000 people DIDN’T) OFF COURSE Ben is never going to vote against FPTP because he is planning to stay there until retirement.
Ben Carr won with 14,278 votes, meaning that only 21% of eligible voters actually supported him. If we consider the entire population of our riding, only 14% of the people who live here voted for Ben Carr. Twice as many people in Winnipeg South Centre didn’t vote than voted for Ben Carr - This is where our NDP can make gains without being scared of the big “split the left boogie man”
Anyone reading about this for 5 minutes knows proportional representation offers a fairer alternative. It is based on a simple yet powerful principle: the percentage of seats a party wins should reflect the percentage of votes it receives. If a party gets 30 percent of the vote, they should get 30 percent of the seats in Parliament. There are different models of PR used worldwide and they have pros and cons but the core principle remains the same—every vote counts, and every voter is represented fairly. We need to push for this, do the work and fin d the system that represents Canada the best.
Counted amongst the reasons Not to vote many young people express that they feel their votes don’t matter - and they are kind of right. We need to build a better democracy for them. A voting system they can believe in.
POSSIBLE OPTIONS FOR POLICY
In the Mixed-Member Proportional system, used in Germany and New Zealand, voters elect both local MPs and regional representatives to ensure proportional outcomes. The Single Transferable Vote , used in Ireland and parts of Australia, allows voters to rank candidates, reducing wasted votes and ensuring broader representation.
Countries that use PR tend to have higher voter turnout because people feel their votes actually matter. PR countries often see participation rates 7 to 10 percent higher than FPTP countries. The system results in better representation, giving women, minorities, and smaller parties a fairer chance of winning seats, leading to more diverse legislatures that reflect society. PR also encourages stronger policies, as coalition governments must work together rather than engage in the toxic winner-takes-all approach of FPTP. It eliminates the need for strategic voting, allowing voters to support the parties they truly believe in rather than voting out of fear.
Critics of PR often claim it leads to unstable governments but, PR countries often have more stable policies because coalition governments encourage long-term collaboration. Canada has had more snap elections under FPTP than many PR-using countries. Others argue that PR is too complicated - but Canadians already use ranked ballots in party leadership races and municipal elections. A canada-designed PR system can be simple and easy to understand. There is also concern that PR will allow extremist parties to gain power, but in practice, PR does not give extremists more influence—it simply reflects voter preferences. Many PR systems include a minimum threshold to prevent fringe parties from dominating. The only real way to curb extremism is to fund education. Another policy we need to prioritize.
Canadians deserve a democracy where every vote matters. The current system is broken, and proportional representation is the best solution. Electoral reform is necessary to ensure that our government truly reflects the will of the people. To push for change, Canadians must engage in the conversation, demand action, and support initiatives like those led by Fair Vote Canada. A voting system that works for everyone—not just the political elite—is a fundamental part of a healthy democracy.
References
Fair Vote Canada. "What is Proportional Representation?" fairvote.ca
Fair Vote Canada. "A Look at the Evidence." fairvote.ca
Franson, Gayvin. Brief to the Special Committee on Electoral Reform. Government of Canada. ourcommons.ca
Hawkins, Howie. "Escaping the Left’s Electoral Impasse: Ranked Choice Voting and Proportional Representation." howiehawkins.us
Courtney, John C. "Implications of Proportional Representation (PR) in Canada." Policy Options, IRPP, November 2017.policyoptions.irpp.org
