What Is The Political Process In Canada's Electoral Process

In a democratic system it is vital that citizens engage in their civic duty of voting; only then can a proper governing body be chosen to represent the will of the majority. Abraham Lincoln got to the core of democracy when he stated, “the government of the people, by the people and for the people.” In the last 50 years of Canadian history we have begun to see a decline in voter turnout; ranging from 80% of citizens voting in 1962, gradually dwindling to 59.1% in the year 2008 (Dickerson, Flanagan & O'Neill, 2010). It is important to understand why

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

The electoral system in Canada is also known as a “first past the post” system. “First past the post” means the candidate with the highest number of votes wins the congressional seat, whereas the other candidates with a lower number of votes don’t get any representation. There are many cons to this system that will be highlighted throughout this essay. I will argue that the electoral system requires reform due to the discrepancies between the percentage of popular votes and the number of seats won. Canada’s electoral system has many problems and is not seen as fully democratic since it has provided poor representation for both candidates that win and lose. Candidates can win seats with less than 50% of votes, meaning that even if the majority of the nation, or province did not vote for the candidate they still win the election as they consume the highest number of votes among the parties. FPTP allows two people in different ridings to get the same number of votes with the outcome of one winner since the distribution of votes and seats are unequal. The system can also encourage strategic voting such as not voting for whom you think is the best fit but voting for the candidate that seems most likely to win in order to beat candidate you dislike. FPTP leads to an imbalance of power and has the potential for corruption.

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.

According to Elections Canada (2011), the right to vote is a major equitable right that is ensured by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is the foundation of democracy. When we vote, we pick the representatives who will make the laws and strategies that represent how we live together. The authenticity of an administration lies in the way that it is chosen. Low voter turnouts may call into inquiry the legitimacy of authority. While democracy includes a great deal holding elections every five years, voting is an effective approach to make an impression on governments and legislators. The more votes, the more compelling the message is. Ultimately, each vote counts. To vote in Canada at any level of government, you must be a Canadian citizen. (“Why Should I Vote”, 2011) As a result, masses of adults who reside in Canada are denied the right to vote because they are not Canadian citizens. There is no question that the status of citizenship has been contested since the migration trend in Canada soared the past 20 years. (Siemiatycki, 2011) These residents work, pay local taxes, use city services, send their children to school but cannot vote. (Munro, 2008) Giving non-citizens voting rights would give permanent residents an opportunity to participate in decisions made on local services and issues, fostering a sense of

Since party politics began in Canada, the style in which leaders are elected is comparable to a horse race. Using the single member plurality (SMP), more commonly referred to as “first past the post,” method of seat allocation in both the House of Commons and each province's Legislative Assembly, whoever gets the most votes is asked to form the government; this only takes into accounts the number of seats a party wins, not the overall popular vote. In a political system not limited to two parties, like the United States, many times over 50% of Canadians do not want the party that won, to win. In this current electoral system, votes are wasted, smaller parties are terribly misrepresented and, in some cases, a party with a lower percent 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

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

With all this in mind, there is no way to deny the progress made by Canada in addressing the voter turnout issue in these 2015 elections and in order to keep this trend and even improve it, there are so many ways to encourage citizens for Canada to achieve a daily democracy contributing to an healthy political environment. Because of historical and situational factors, Canada had a democratic deficit manifested by discouragement and a lack of participation in political activities from citizens, that had lasted for one decade but now, times have changed and Canada is living a revolution with a higher participation in the 2015 elections that shows the clear will of Canadian citizens to get involved in political activities, act for the change and defend the democracy they cherish.

The SMP system requires the winning candidate to have the highest number of votes in each constituency, thus this system does not require an absolute majority and candidates can win their seats with less than 50% of the votes (Press,T.C., 2015). The SMP system has a significant amount of flaws that are inherent within its’ structure. More specifically, this can be seen when analyzing a party’s share of votes in comparison with the share of seats they win, and how the best candidate may not be represented in each riding (Heard, n.d). There are a few appealing alternatives to the current Canadian electoral system. Those are a presidential system and a proportional representation system. A presidential system differs from a parliamentary system in that the President is directly chosen, as apposed to voting for a party to win(Moe & Cadwell, 1994). Proportional representation provides parties with a share of the seats that is proportional to their share of votes (Lijphart, 1999). This allows for the public to more effectively vote for a person who will represent their beliefs even if they may not win the constituency.

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

As part of the Canadian Constitution, general elections are to be held at least once every five years. This year Prime Minister Stephen Harper has called an early election for October 19, making it the longest campaign held in Canada with 36 weeks of campaigning. This elections is being held because of the Elections Act which states that a general election must take place on the third Monday of every fourth year. The previous election was called in 2011 because PC’s minority government collapsed, meaning in the 41st election they won a majority government and now four years later another election is forced to be called.

Altering the electoral system would undoubtedly benefit Canada in numerous ways through the use of a mixed electoral system using proportional representation and alternative voting. Over the course of Canada’s history, debate over electoral reform has appeared occasionally, with varying levels of intensity (Courtney 2005:154). Regardless, the amount of times that the topic has been discussed, demonstrates the need for its consideration. The word “change” often promotes a negative connotation, suggesting decreases in quality of government. However, it is important for one to focus on not “changing” the system, but rather improving it. This can be done through different voting methods such as proportional representation or alternative voting. Of course, there are disadvantages that could arise from electoral reform, especially in the case of either suggested systems. However, the vast advantages ultimately outweigh all potential consequences, justifying this action. Conclusively, it is advantageous to undergo electoral reform through a mixed election system of proportional representation and alternative voting, despite arguments opposed to both matters.

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.

There is a fundamental problem with democracy in Canada. The problem is rooted within our federal parliamentary voting-system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the proportional representation system, known as the party list format (party-list PR), at the federal level if we wish to promote the expansion of democracy. If Canada embraces proportional representation in the battle for electoral reform then we will see beneficial results. Party-list PR will increase voter participation, which in turn will create more accurate representation in the parliament and ultimately a positive shift away from our disturbingly partisan dominated political culture.