You hear a lot about this "S.T.V." vs. "First past the post". Is the S.T.V. all it's cracked up to be? Is it going to ensure more fairness at the ballot box? Under the old system isn't it equally fair for all parties running? Are not these situations where a small percentage of the electorate gets a bigger percentage of the seats, just an anomaly that can favour all parties equally? Is the "S.T.V." going to be void of such anomalies? Will the "S.T.V. result in a lower turnout at the polls? Let's hear some INFORMED opinions.
First off, First past the post is fair only if all candidates can play on an equal footing, without misleading people. Right now, if you look at your federal ballot, you'll notice that the party name appears under the candidate name. This risks misleadin some people into thinking that they're voting for the party, not the candidate. And then when we consider that a great many Canadians vote party as a matter of family tradition (don't laugh, I've met enough of them),then this clearly puts a candidate with a famous brand under his name at a great advantage over an independent candidate. The independent can be a high quality candidate, and the candidate with the famous brand under his name can be a complete moron. Yet, if they like that moron's leader, they might vote for him anyway. Is that fair to the independent candidate?
The only way for first past the post to be fair is to switch to a non-partisan democracy as has been done in the NWT and Nunavut.
If we continue with partisan democracy, however, then we must recognize that people are voting party already anyway, so to be fair, that should be recognized in the voting process. STV is a mixed system in that it also allows for independents to run,while still allowing people who vote party to do that too.
There is also a pure proportional system which is a list system. In such a system, independents cannot run. On your ballot you have no personal names, only a list of all Canadian federal parties. You vote explicitely for party, not candidate. All the votes nationwide are added up, and that determines how many candidates per party in paliament, chosen by the parties.
Personally, I lean in favour of a non-partisan first past the post system. If it's going to be partisan, however, then I'd lean STV as it still allows independents to run democratically.
The list system is the worst option in my opinion as it gives parties total power over the candidate. You think parties are powerful now? Just wait for thelist system to come into place.
But I believe that the best way to preserve the FPTP system for those who support it is in fact to switch to a non-partisan system as it eliminates the current legitimate criticism against it, which is that it's not fair when we're voting candidate and yet the ballot gives the false impression that we're voting party.