First Past The Post Analysis

While the Liberals did not formally propose an alternative to FPTP, Justin Trudeau offered two alternatives in a 2015 speech in Ottawa – ranked ballots, and proportional representation (Minsky, 2015). Ranked ballots, otherwise known as Alternative Vote (AV) work similarly to FPTP. However, instead of simply indicating their favourite candidate on the ballot, voters rank candidates from most to least preferred. Candidates must then reach at least 50% to win the race. Should this not happen on the first counting, the lowest-scoring candidate is dropped, and their votes are assigned to each voter’s indicated second choice. While this method does improve on FPTP in that it requires at least a 50% majority to win even when three or more candidates

In this essay I will assess the outcomes of Additional Member system, First Past the Post system and the Closed Party List system. The F-P-T-P system is used to elect the members of House of Commons and local government in England and Wales. Voters select candidates, and do so by marking his or her name with an ‘X’ on the ballot paper. This reflects the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. The Additional Members system is used in Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, and Northern Ireland Assembly and Greater London assembly. It is a mixed system made up of F-P-T-P and party-list elements. The Regional party list (or the closed party list) is used to elect the

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

The main reason why this system is unfair is because each riding is won by the candidate who receives the most votes, even if that candidate receives less than half of the constituency. Therefore, it is possible for a political party to win a majority of seats in the House of Commons. A disadvantage of FPTP voting is that a small increase in the number of votes a party's candidate receives results in a larger increase in the number of seats that party's candidate wins. For example, in the 2011 federal election the Conservative Party received 39.62% of the total votes but won 54% of the seats, while the NDP captured 30.63% of the total votes, but received only 33.12% seats. Smaller parties are affected

Since the conception of the country Canada’s elections have worked within the confines of the First-Past-The-Post system, also known as the single-member-plurality system. The system has functioned the way it was intended to for the majority of the countries existence. However, after the introduction of legitimized additional parties into the Canadian political wasteland, the SMP (single-member-plurality) system has been producing less than democratic results. It has also been said that the SMP system was never truly democratic in the first place, particularity because of the power centralized within the ruling party as a result of the system. If Canada is going to continue to be touted as a free and prosperous it would be sensible to adopt

The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen

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

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.

When evaluating the liberal democracy or constitutional monarchy in Canada it is imperative to identify that the Canadian governing system cannot unambiguously be either correct or incorrect. Hence, Canada’s democratic system functions well enough; nonetheless it would further benefit from adopting a Nordic democratic-socialist model as well as adopting a proportional representation electoral system. A Nordic democratic system would benefit the citizens by providing them with universal health care, closely similar wages, free and inexpensive education, public pension plans, and virtually free trade. Second, if Canada is to adopt a proportional representation system the citizens will be better represented. Despite these flaws in the liberal

The design of the electoral system is another great contributor to the rise of regional conflicts. Elections in Canada are based on a system known as the “first-past-the-post system” (Stilborn, 26). This system was created where constituents of all ridings are able to elect a single candidate as their representation within regards of their political party. In its essence, the candidate with the largest percentage of the vote in his or her respective riding receives the seat in the House of Commons. This system leads to a debate as to whether or not the outcomes of elections are truly representing party preference on the national scale. This debate is primarily based on the fact that candidates are able to win an election in a constituency, regardless if they received the majority vote or not. Also, the number of

Never the less, it may seem straight forward and simple but it has a variety of advantages and disadvantages. The fact it's simple is one of the advantages, not only is it simple to understand but the ballot paper is simple as you can only cast one vote. Also, it produces a quick and clear vote and it also produces a stable government as the winning party adds a bonus of seats and single party governments with a working majority have significant control over the legislative process, both of these factors contributing to the creation of a stable government. However, despite these advantages the First Past the Post system produces disproportional outcomes, this is where the amount of seats won in the election doesn't reflect the share of votes received. Also, it favours plurality rather than majority support, so the victorious candidates don't need a majority to gain power. Not only this, but First Past the Post produces votes of unequal value, the constituencies are roughly the same size, they're not exactly the same size which means different constituencies have votes of different values, also most votes are wasted due to tactical voting so these votes don't even help elect the MPs. Never the less, First Past the Post produces a responsible government as well as a strong government. Voters have a clear choice

In February 2017, Prime Minister (PM) Justin Trudeau announced that his government would not include electoral reform in the mandate of newly appointed Minister of Democratic Institutions, Karina Gould. This stands in contrast to campaign promises the Liberal party made during the 2015 general election where, then candidate Trudeau, promised that the first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system would be abolished in time for the 2019 election; in favour of a proportionally representative system that was less binary in result and more conducive to diversity in representation. He defended his position, stating that after extensive review on the part of Minister Gould’s predecessor, it was clear that Canadians did not have a clear preference

Although the Conservative party still had a strong stand in the prairies, which was also the key region to the Conservative majority party in the 2011 federal election, because of the Canadian electoral system, the Ontario region had more seats in the parliament; in which when the conservatives lost their support in the Ontario region, they have lost quite a few seats in the parliament. As the Conservative party lost their support in the Ontario region, the liberals took over the Ontario region and won 80 seats. The Liberals led by Pierre Trudeau won 184 seats in parliament and formed a majority government, and the conservatives with 99 seats as the opposition party after 9 years as the governing party. The Canadian electoral system that help the Liberal party to win the election is called the majoritarian system and Canada uses the “first-past-the-post” sub-system with the “single member district system” from the majoritarian

One of the problems of First Past the Post is that it promotes what is known as minority rule. Minority rule is when a party that only received a small percentage of the overall votes gets total control in parliament, completely disregarding the true opinions of the majority of voters. This type of democratic rule is well in play under the use of First Past the Post as our electoral system. For example, in one of the more memorable UK elections, in 2015, the winning party the Conservatives received only 37% of the votes, which means that nearly