Essay on Electoral Reform in Canada

The 1996 provincial election of British Columbia, produced what was considered to be a “wrong-winner” scenario, in which the party that received a majority of the votes received significantly less than a majority of the seats available for representation. The falsely represented party and its supporters were understandably furious. As a result, many pushed for electoral reform to prevent a similar outcome in future elections. Campaigns, such as The Free Your Vote, aimed towards ensuring more accurate elections, but failed to produce any real change was made. Then in the 2001 election, the exact opposite happened; the party that had received a majority of the votes but had poor representation in the 1996 election had now received less than a majority of the votes but received a majority of the seats. Yet again, a “wrong-winner” had been named. The fundamental idea that a party and the number of

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

Another important reason that Canada should select a different election system is that the FPTP system has a large impact on smaller parties. According to Political Scientist Maurice Duverger’s Law, given enough time FPTP systems will eventually become a

Since the turn of the twenty first century, in Canada voter turnout has made a significant and consecutive decline. In the last five federal elections on average only sixty-one per cent of eligible voters voted. If each eligible citizen voted in an election the government would be on par with the primary interests of the people. The easiest way to achieve this objective is by implementing a compulsory voting system. Mandatory voting systems are appealing because all citizens are affected by decisions made by the government, so it makes sense to have all those affected apart of the election process. As a result, the voting results would be more representative of the country and that would lead to an increase of stability and legitimacy.

There is a fundamental problem with the democratic process in Canada. This problem is rooted within our electoral system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the mixed-member proportional representation electoral system (MMP) at the federal level if we wish to see the progression of modern democracy. The failure to do so will result in a stagnant political system that is caught in the past and unable to rise to the contemporary challenges that representative democracies face. If Canada chooses to embrace the MMP electoral system it will reap the benefits of greater proportionality, prevent the centralization of power that is occurring in Parliament and among political parties through an increased

On July 1st, 1867, Canada confederated into a nation and committed to uphold democracy “From Sea to Sea”. As stated in the Constitution of our nation, Canada would be governed through a Parliamentary system, with both an upper and lower house of legislature. The lower house, the House of Commons, would include elected members from across the country. Conversely, the upper house, the Senate, according to Section 24 of the Constitution Act (1867), states: “The Governor General shall… summon qualified Persons to the Senate; and… every Person so summoned shall become… a Member of the Senate.”[1] This has amounted to almost 800 Canadians being appointed to the Senate since Confederation. However, as Canadians have grown to demand transparency

The Four Political Parties of Canada       In a country as vast and as culturally diverse as Canada, many different political opinions can be found stretched across the country. From the affluent neighbourhoods of West Vancouver to the small fishing towns located on the east coast of Newfoundland, political opinions and affiliations range from the left wing to the right wing. To represent these varying political views, Canada has four official national political parties to choose from: the Liberals (who are currently in power), the Progressive Conservatives, the New Democrats, and the Reform Party. What is particularly interesting is that none of the latter three parties compose Her Majesty's Official Opposition in the House

It has become widely accepted that Canada uses a first past the post electoral system. However, this system may not be in the best interest of Canada any more. There are many reasons why Canada should change its electoral system to a mixed member proportional one, a variant of proportional representation. With a first past the post system, the elected officials will always be of the majority and this excludes minorities from fair representation. Adopting MMP can create stronger voter turnouts, more personal campaigning, better individual representation, and better party selection. John Hiemstra and Harold Janson, are both in favour of a MMP electoral system. They understand that with the switch, the citizens will get more representation in

Canadian electoral system is largely based on the single member plurality (SMP) system which was inherited from its former British colonial masters. The system dates back to several years before the formation of the Canadian confederation. Some of the common features of the Canadian electoral system include election candidates to represent designated geographical areas popularly known as” ridings”, counting and tallying of the votes casted on the basis of the districts as opposed to the parties of the candidates (Dyck, 622). Finally, a candidate only needs a simple majority over the other candidates in order to be considered a winner, even if the winner has a small percentage of votes. This system has however been heavily criticized for its winner takes all way of judging victory. Critics argue that if the winner takes over the whole system, it may result into unfair representation of the various social groups, but it may also bring into power unstable minority participation in government. For example, a candidate can win even with barely 25% of all the votes casted, while the small parties may end up with no seats in the parliament.

In Canadian government it best to have legislators who do not vote their own interests and they vote the interests of their constituents. If legislators vote in their own interests they could be going against their own parties or the constituents that voted them in. Even if they know a lot about the subject they should still keep their interests out of their decisions and keep the interests of their constituents. Legislators that vote their own interests might even be going against the party policies, which could get them kicked out of the party or disciplined. Legislators are there to represent the people of their riding, not to vote their own interests in.

Now that you are up to date with currents events I will briefly touch on some strong point of the Canadian democratic system. Citizens in Canada indirectly hold power in a free electoral system and are given better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than other systems of government. The freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and the freedom of the media allow citizens to vote in favour of their own interest. Democracy in Canada is rooted on the grounds of equal rights; this gives people equality before the law, human rights, free and fair elections and so on. In comparison to the Third World, power is in the hands of the “Big Men”, the police and army are the ones who hold control not the people and where corruption is a norm, Canada may look like a utopia. Another strong point in the Canadian political system is everyone no matter race or sex has the right to vote as long as you are a Canadian citizen over the age of eighteen. Until the 60s/70s parties would make up electoral boundaries this was done to increase the number of votes in that location this is called gerrymander, this was unfair because certain parties had an advantage over others. However, now under the Electoral Boundaries Commissions this problem does not occur and no party has the upper hand over another. Interestingly the

The federal electoral system, also known as the voting system, is a way for citizens to choose their political representatives. Canada’s federal election takes place every four years, with Canada currently consisting of 338 electoral ridings. The party that is elected with the most ridings in the federal election will be in charge of forming the new government, with the leader of that party being declared the new prime minister of

Which brings into question whether a change in the electoral system would work as an incentive to bring out more people to vote. As a democratic nation and country, whether provincial or federal, the country’s representatives should be elected by majority of the people and not minority of people. Having a government formed on minority voting only leads to having the needs and concerns of those minorities projected as the need of the entire people of the country/province. Manitoba should adopt the single transferable vote electoral system because it will increase voter turnout, create a fair, equal and engaging system and finally, give place to a better democratic environment suited for

In 1971 when the Conservatives ended the Socred hold on power, the Conservative Party succeeded by “neutralizing ideology and focusing on ‘safe change,’ that is, a change of faces but not policies.” The 1971 election brought into office the Progressive Conservative Party under the leadership of Peter Lougheed; Lougheed than served as premier until 1985, when he was replaced by Don Getty. In 1986 general election, Alberta PC win the election with 61 seats, NDP getting 16 seats, liberal getting 4 seats in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta and Alberta PC also win 1989 general election of Alberta. Getty’s decision to resign in 1992 “ushered in the leadership election that provides the point of departure.” Alberta’s electoral history

For decades, Canadians have been defending their right to have a fair and open electoral system. Since its creation in 1867, Canada has been proud to call itself a true democratic country, but today there would be many people who disagree with this statement. The Canadian electoral system, which uses First Past The Post (FPTP), has come under scrutiny for not being as fair as it claims to be. Over the past couple of decades, many countries have switched their system to Proportional Representation (PR) or some form of it. Based on successful results in other nations, Canada’s current FPTP system should change to Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is a form of Proportional Representation, as it will allow for more fair elections. The intent of this paper is to outline how an electoral reform from First Past the Post to Proportional Representation or Mixed-Member Proportional, will lead to more confidence in the government, more accurate seat-vote percentage, and better overall representation of the population.