Dont Let the Results of Germany's election ruin hope of a Proportional Representation Voting System.
By Larry Gordon
While the final outcome of Sunday's election in Germany is unclear, one thing is very predictable. Canadian opponents of electoral reform will portray the results as a reason for Canada to abandon any consideration of proportional representation (PR). The German electoral system is faulty, they will say, because it usually fails to give a free hand and all political power to a single party.
That's a failure? Unlike Canadian elections, the German results actually mirror public opinion. The German electorate is genuinely split on the country's future direction. But at least voters can begin dealing with their options in a political arena with a level playing field. It's called democracy.
In the 81 countries using various forms of PR, what voters say at the ballot box is what they get. A major party drawing 40 per cent of the vote will get about 40 per cent of the seats. A smaller party with 20 per cent of the vote will get about 20 per cent of the seats. If no party has majority support, several who do represent a genuine majority of voters form a coalition or partnership. Usually, the partners are relatively like minded parties that have overlap in a number of key policy areas.
According to our home grown PR critics, such voting systems based on voter equality and true majority rule are a bad idea. Good democracy, they argue, is the path to bad government.
But let's take a sober look at how we elect Parliament and form government in Canada . In every election, our system distorts what voters say and usually gives unearned majority control to one party. A party winning only 40 per cent of the votes can readily gain 60 per cent of the seats and 100 per cent of the power. Since the First World War, Canadians have had only four legitimate majority governments, where the governing party was put in power by a majority of voters. In 1997, Jean Chretien won a majority of seats with only 38 per cent of the popular vote and, like all his predecessors, still claimed a mandate from the people.
Are these phony majorities just the price we have to pay for stable and effective government? Certainly not. Consider the many decades of experience in Western democracies using fair voting systems.
These countries are very well governed by coalition governments. In most cases, the parties that form the coalitions are quite predictable.
Coalition agreements tend to focus on areas of policy overlap. That explains why coalition governments are actually better at passing legislation in line with public opinion not surprising given that they represent a genuine majority of voters. Unlike the picture painted by PR critics, coalitions are seldom directed by the whims of tiny parties blackmailing large parties. Large parties know they would be severely punished at the next election for caving in to unacceptable demands.
Reform critics also love to promote the myth that PR leads to a wild proliferation of small parties. Most major PR countries, however, have thresholds. For example, a party might be required to win more than 5 per cent of the vote before earning the right to win any seats. On average, PR countries may have a few more effective political parties than other countries.
What about government stability? When the voting system changes, political behavior changes. Under PR, the political culture becomes centred on negotiation and compromise among parties. Seldom, if ever, can one party hope to capture complete control of parliament by forcing an election. Unnecessary and frequent elections would likely bring back the Same parties to the same coalitions. That is why European PR countries tend to have elections no more frequently than Canada .
Not surprisingly, the pundits and political leaders who tremble at the thought of every Canadian having an equal vote will seize upon any event, such as the German election, to try blunting the demand for electoral reform in Canada .
Fortunately, they are losing the fight and standing on the wrong side of history. Canadians are finally beginning to understand that our current voting system is a major roadblock to building a healthy 21 st -century democracy.
Larry Gordon is executive director of Fair Vote Canada, a national multipartisan citizens' campaign, for electoral reform.
Link
By Larry Gordon
While the final outcome of Sunday's election in Germany is unclear, one thing is very predictable. Canadian opponents of electoral reform will portray the results as a reason for Canada to abandon any consideration of proportional representation (PR). The German electoral system is faulty, they will say, because it usually fails to give a free hand and all political power to a single party.
That's a failure? Unlike Canadian elections, the German results actually mirror public opinion. The German electorate is genuinely split on the country's future direction. But at least voters can begin dealing with their options in a political arena with a level playing field. It's called democracy.
In the 81 countries using various forms of PR, what voters say at the ballot box is what they get. A major party drawing 40 per cent of the vote will get about 40 per cent of the seats. A smaller party with 20 per cent of the vote will get about 20 per cent of the seats. If no party has majority support, several who do represent a genuine majority of voters form a coalition or partnership. Usually, the partners are relatively like minded parties that have overlap in a number of key policy areas.
According to our home grown PR critics, such voting systems based on voter equality and true majority rule are a bad idea. Good democracy, they argue, is the path to bad government.
But let's take a sober look at how we elect Parliament and form government in Canada . In every election, our system distorts what voters say and usually gives unearned majority control to one party. A party winning only 40 per cent of the votes can readily gain 60 per cent of the seats and 100 per cent of the power. Since the First World War, Canadians have had only four legitimate majority governments, where the governing party was put in power by a majority of voters. In 1997, Jean Chretien won a majority of seats with only 38 per cent of the popular vote and, like all his predecessors, still claimed a mandate from the people.
Are these phony majorities just the price we have to pay for stable and effective government? Certainly not. Consider the many decades of experience in Western democracies using fair voting systems.
These countries are very well governed by coalition governments. In most cases, the parties that form the coalitions are quite predictable.
Coalition agreements tend to focus on areas of policy overlap. That explains why coalition governments are actually better at passing legislation in line with public opinion not surprising given that they represent a genuine majority of voters. Unlike the picture painted by PR critics, coalitions are seldom directed by the whims of tiny parties blackmailing large parties. Large parties know they would be severely punished at the next election for caving in to unacceptable demands.
Reform critics also love to promote the myth that PR leads to a wild proliferation of small parties. Most major PR countries, however, have thresholds. For example, a party might be required to win more than 5 per cent of the vote before earning the right to win any seats. On average, PR countries may have a few more effective political parties than other countries.
What about government stability? When the voting system changes, political behavior changes. Under PR, the political culture becomes centred on negotiation and compromise among parties. Seldom, if ever, can one party hope to capture complete control of parliament by forcing an election. Unnecessary and frequent elections would likely bring back the Same parties to the same coalitions. That is why European PR countries tend to have elections no more frequently than Canada .
Not surprisingly, the pundits and political leaders who tremble at the thought of every Canadian having an equal vote will seize upon any event, such as the German election, to try blunting the demand for electoral reform in Canada .
Fortunately, they are losing the fight and standing on the wrong side of history. Canadians are finally beginning to understand that our current voting system is a major roadblock to building a healthy 21 st -century democracy.
Larry Gordon is executive director of Fair Vote Canada, a national multipartisan citizens' campaign, for electoral reform.
Link
