Could Canada’s Voting System Change for the Better? Exploring the Alternative Vote

Canada’s current voting system, First Past the Post (FPTP), has been a staple of its democracy for decades. While it offers simplicity and strong local representation, it often falls short in proportionality and voter choice. Amid ongoing debates about electoral reform, one alternative gaining attention is the Alternative Vote (AV) system. Though no voting system is perfect, the AV system may be Canada’s best option, as it balances the strengths of FPTP while addressing some of its flaws.

Simplicity and Local Representation: The Strengths of FPTP and AV

One of the key strengths of FPTP is its simplicity. Voters mark a single choice for their preferred candidate, and the one with the most votes wins. This straightforward process has made FPTP an accessible system for voters across Canada, regardless of education level or familiarity with politics. However, the AV system maintains this simplicity while offering more flexibility. Instead of choosing just one candidate, voters rank their preferences. Even with this slight adjustment, most Canadians could find it better to rank their top three choices and be more specific on who they want running their country.

Local representation is another hallmark of FPTP that the AV system preserves. Under both systems, each district elects a single representative, ensuring that geographic and cultural diversity is reflected in Parliament. This is especially important in a country as large and varied as Canada, where local concerns can differ significantly from one region to another.

Increased Voter Choice

Where the AV system stands out is its ability to offer greater voter choice. In FPTP, voters are limited to picking one candidate, which often forces them to “settle” for their least-worst option to avoid splitting the vote. With AV, voters can rank multiple candidates, ensuring that their preferences are more fully reflected. If their top choice is eliminated, their vote transfers to their second choice, and so on, until one candidate secures a majority.

This ranking system not only empowers voters but also provides valuable insights to political parties. Even if lower-ranked candidates lose, parties can analyze ranking data to understand which districts they performed well in and where they need to improve.

Proportionality: The Persistent Challenge

One common criticism of both FPTP and AV is their lack of proportionality. In FPTP, the candidate with the most votes wins outright, regardless of how many votes opposing candidates receive. Similarly, AV ensures that the first candidate or party to gain over 50% of the votes wins, leaving smaller parties underrepresented. While proportionality remains a shortcoming of the AV system, it is no worse than FPTP in this regard.

Canada’s ongoing reliance on FPTP suggests that proportionality is currently a secondary priority to simplicity and local representation. The AV system makes the same compromise but offers additional benefits, making it a sensible upgrade.

Conclusion

Electoral reform is always a complex and contentious issue. Implementing a new system would require significant political will and public buy-in. However, the Alternative Vote presents a compelling case as a replacement for Canada’s First Past the Post system. It preserves simplicity and local representation while introducing greater voter choice, making it a better fit for a modern, diverse Canada.

If Canada is willing to accept the trade-offs of FPTP, why not adopt a system that offers more upside for nearly the same cost?