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
The AMS and FPTP are voting systems in use for the Scottish Parliament and House of Commons elections respectively. It can be argued that AMS gives voters more choice and better representation than FPTP, and in order to assess the validity of this argument 3 key indicators must be analysed: constituency links; proportionality and representation of smaller parties.
The second reason why FPTP should not be used for elections to the House of Commons is that it is not representative, meaning that the percentage share of votes is not proportional to the percentage share of seats, because of single member constituencies. This is a weakness as it means that there is not a fair level of representation within the House of Commons, which makes the system less democratic as not everybody’s views are entirely represented in Parliament. For example, in the 2010 general elections, the Conservative party won 36% of votes, but a staggering 47.1% of seats, whilst UKIP gained 3.1% of votes, but 0% of seats, indicating the tendency of FPTP to radically distort the relationship between votes and seats. Due to the fact that FPTP is a plurality system, rather than a majoritarian one, MPs can win the seat by as little as 1 vote, meaning that
FPTP is the voting system used for the election of MPs to 'seats' in the UK Parliament. It is a system in which the 'winner takes all' and usually gives a clear majority both at constituency and national level. This means that a candidate in a constituency only needs one more vote than the nearest rival to win the seat. Similarly, political parties only need to win one more seat in the House of Commons to have a majority.
We are the new winning party that will benefit you from head to toe. We will exceed the Liberals at allowing more help to people in need.
Also F-P-T-P ensures that one party obtains a majority of seats, for example, there have only been three full coalition governments in the UK- two in world wars and one in 2010. Therefore, F-P-T-P voting system produces different outcomes to other voting systems as it’s a majority system.
In recent news headlines, the Liberal Party of Canada headed by Justin Trudeau have discussed very tangible stimulants for our economy. Through continued downward spiral of our economy by the conservative government in past years, we can see that it is no easy task and therefore drastic measures are necessary for success. $125 billion dollars drastic. The old saying you need to spend money to make money needs to be looked at. The economy needs money in it to stimulate growth. In the CBC news article "Justin Trudeau says Liberals plan 3 years of deficits to push infrastructure" which can be found at http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-liberals-infrastructure-deficits-1.3205535, Trudeau outlines plans to spend $125 billion on
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was the 15th Prime Minister of Canada. He served as Prime Minister from April 1968 to June 1984. During his time in office, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced many new policies. Pierre Trudeau’s policies on the economy, the environment and multiculturalism greatly benefitted Canada.
First-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system in general allows candidates to win who may not have a majority of the vote. It privileges big parties and majorities at the cost of smaller parties and coalitions. It also favours parties with strong regional concentrations over parties whose electoral base is more spread out. This is Canada’s current election system and for the past couple of years. In the years that Harper has been in power, he has won majority of the seats with less than 50 percent of the votes. In fact, in 2011, “Stephen Harper won a majority government with 54.1 percent of the seats and only 39.6 percent of the total vote” (Aucoin 161). Harper was able to form a majority government without a majority of the vote and he had a plurality of votes that was less than 50 percent. Canada has been electing its government in this way and the winning party does not hold the majority of the votes, with a few exceptions. In terms of changing the election system, FPTP system is able to produce a clear majority and the majority that wins is able to produce a clear line of power through a majority government. Also, supporters of FPTP, such as Brian Crowly, say that clear lines of power are
The (FPTP) system is also known as the 'winner-take-all' system, in which the candidate with the most votes gets elected. FPTP voting methods can be used for single and multiple member elections. In a single member election the candidate with the highest number, not necessarily a majority, of votes is elected.
In the last week of April, Justin Trudeau visited Saskatoon’s Oskayak High School. During his visit, he received “tough questions from First Nations teens on their futures and his promises” (Harper A6). The teens asked about First Nations suicides, genocide, Third World living conditions and respect for treaties. “How do you intend to honour the promises your ancestors made with mine exactly written in all the signed treaties across Canada, to make up and pay for the acts of genocide our ancestors were subject to long before and after the signing of Treaty Six?” “How do you (…) plan to right the wrongs of the past 22 elected prime ministers who failed?” “Are we not considered Canadians? If we are, why do you allow the First People of this land
The system that the Law Commission ultimately recommended was the mixed-member proportional electoral system. In the MMP system a portion of representatives, usually between 50 and 60 percent, are elected from single-member districts, similar to FPTP, with the remainder of seats being elected from party lists, based on the party’s share of the popular vote (Law Commission 22). Each voter gets to cast two votes, one for the party that they support and another for the representative member that they prefer. Party lists can be either closed, where voters are not able to influence the order of candidates, or open, where voters have the ability to influence the ranking of candidates. A threshold for representation is usually set in order to prevent fringe and extremist parties from gaining seats in government. This system is used in Germany, New Zealand, Venezuela and Lesotho (Joseph 113).
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.
The Single Transferable Vote system is a system that was invented by a mathematician whose processes are lengthy and confusing to the people who actually use it to implement change: voters. The currently used Single Member Plurality system is widely understood and the best system for Manitoban voters. While some may argue that the Single Transferrable Vote system is a superior method of electing members of government in Manitoba, due to the unfamiliarity with candidates, lack of voter involvement, and confusing nature of the system, the current Single Member Plurality system is more effective and reflective of the actual views of the electors.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau and Martin Brian Mulroney were both greatly renowned Canadian prime ministers for their time. Trudeau being the ladies man and Mulroney being the strait arrow ,they were both complete opposites. Mulroney was as conservative as Trudeau was a liberal.
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.