Upload
bailey
View
36
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
BC Electoral Experiments & Reform Initiatives and Impulses. Weekend 2 : Session 3. BC Electoral Experiments. An electoral system is more than just an electoral formula The franchise (who is eligible to vote) The way the list of voters is compiled - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
BC Electoral BC Electoral ExperimentsExperiments
& & Reform Initiatives and Reform Initiatives and
ImpulsesImpulses
Weekend 2 : Session 3Weekend 2 : Session 3
BC Electoral ExperimentsBC Electoral Experiments
An electoral system is more than just an An electoral system is more than just an electoral formulaelectoral formula
The franchise (who is eligible to vote)The franchise (who is eligible to vote) The way the list of voters is compiledThe way the list of voters is compiled The way electoral district boundaries are The way electoral district boundaries are
drawndrawn The design of the ballot paperThe design of the ballot paper The regulation of campaigningThe regulation of campaigning
BC Electoral ExperimentsBC Electoral Experiments
Two experiments are of interest to the Two experiments are of interest to the Citizens’ AssemblyCitizens’ Assembly
The use of multimember districts from The use of multimember districts from 1871 until the general election in 19911871 until the general election in 1991
The use of the alternative vote (AV) for The use of the alternative vote (AV) for the general elections of 1952 and 1953the general elections of 1952 and 1953
Multimember districtsMultimember districts
The BC Legislative Assembly has always The BC Legislative Assembly has always had single member districts but, from had single member districts but, from 1871 until the 1991 general election they 1871 until the 1991 general election they were supplemented with a variety of 2, 3, were supplemented with a variety of 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 member districts4, 5, and 6 member districts
The multimember districts with the most The multimember districts with the most members were used for Vancouver and members were used for Vancouver and VictoriaVictoria
Proportion of BC Legislative Assembly members elected from single member districts, general elections 1871-2001 (percent)
0
25
50
75
100
18
71
18
78
18
86
18
94
19
00
19
07
19
12
19
20
19
28
19
37
19
45
19
52
19
56
19
63
19
69
19
75
19
83
19
91
20
01
Election Year
Proportion of BC Legislative Assembly members elected from multimember districts, general elections 1871-2001 (percent)
0
25
50
75
100
1871187518781882188618901894189819001903190719091912191619201924192819331937194119451949195219531956196019631966196919721975197919831986199119962001
Election Year
2 member 3 member 4 member 5 member 6 member
The alternative vote (AV)The alternative vote (AV)
(AV will be discussed in detail at next (AV will be discussed in detail at next weekend’s meeting)weekend’s meeting)
Requires a preferential ballotRequires a preferential ballot Voters must rank candidatesVoters must rank candidates Where no candidate gains a majority of Where no candidate gains a majority of
first preferences, the least successful first preferences, the least successful candidate is eliminated and his/her candidate is eliminated and his/her second preferences are transferredsecond preferences are transferred
Diagram of the ballot used for the AV electoral system for the BC general elections of 1952 and 1953
Joanna (Conservative) 1 Joanna (Conservative)
Fred (NDP) 4 Fred (NDP)
Neal (Social Credit) 2 Neal (Social Credit)
Pauline (Liberal) 3 Pauline (Liberal)
An example of electoral An example of electoral engineering?engineering?
Yes but, depending on one’s view, it backfired Yes but, depending on one’s view, it backfired on the parties which introduced iton the parties which introduced it
Social Credit formed a minority Social Credit formed a minority government after the 1952 electiongovernment after the 1952 election
Once Social Credit had won a majority Once Social Credit had won a majority government at the 1953 general election, government at the 1953 general election, it reintroduced plurality votingit reintroduced plurality voting
AlbertaAlberta
Alberta has been the most adventurous Alberta has been the most adventurous province in adopting electoral systems. province in adopting electoral systems. From 1926 until 1955, general elections From 1926 until 1955, general elections
used preferential votingused preferential voting
AV in single member districts outside AV in single member districts outside Calgary and EdmontonCalgary and Edmonton
PR-STV for multimember districts in PR-STV for multimember districts in Calgary and EdmontonCalgary and Edmonton
Political rather than electoral Political rather than electoral changechange
There have been only few electoral changes There have been only few electoral changes in BC, but there has been a lot of political in BC, but there has been a lot of political
changechange
The electoral system shapes the way The electoral system shapes the way political change is reflected in the political change is reflected in the
Legislative AssemblyLegislative Assembly
BC Legislative Assembly: Vote share (%) of Conservatives, Liberals, CCF/NDP, & Social Credit, General Elections 1903-2001
0
50
100
1903
1907
1909
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1933
1937
1941
1945
1949
1952
1953
1956
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1979
1983
1986
1991
1996
2001
Election year
Conservative Party Liberal Party CCF/ NDP Social Credit
BC Legislative Assembly: Seat share (%) of Conservatives, Liberals, CCF/NDP, & Social Credit, General Elections 1903-2001
0
50
100
1903
1907
1909
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1933
1937
1941
1945
1949
1952
1953
1956
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1979
1983
1986
1991
1996
2001
Election year
Conservative Party Liberal Party CCF/ NDP Social Credit
Reform Initiatives & ImpulsesReform Initiatives & Impulses
Equal VotesEqual Votes Artificial MajoritiesArtificial Majorities Wrong WinnersWrong Winners Oversized GovernmentsOversized Governments Under-representationUnder-representation Reform InitiativesReform Initiatives
Equal Votes: Equal Votes: (Mal)Apportionment(Mal)Apportionment
District # voters Winner (Party)
Winner’s vote
Loser’s vote
Atlin 4,195 Al Passarell (NDP)
1,587 1,208
Surrey(2)
56,576(103,152)
Rita Johnston (SC)
38,081 34,082
Equal Votes ??Equal Votes ??
19831983 Atlin : SurreyAtlin : Surrey 12 - 1 12 - 1
20012001 Peace River S : Saanich & Peace River S : Saanich & IslandsIslands
2.32.3 - 1 - 1
What difference is acceptable?What difference is acceptable?
Artificial MajoritiesArtificial Majorities
Majority Government in BC
0
50
100
1953 1956 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1979 1983 1986 1991 1996 2001
%
Vote Share Seat Share
Artificial MajoritiesArtificial Majorities
Few Governments ever win the majority of Few Governments ever win the majority of the votes of the populationthe votes of the population
PROPRO Artificial majorities produce stable Artificial majorities produce stable 1-party governments we would 1-party governments we would
not not otherwise haveotherwise have
CONCONGovernments have false legitimacy to Governments have false legitimacy to impose policies that do not have impose policies that do not have
majority supportmajority support
Wrong WinnersWrong WinnersDistrictDistrict NDPNDP LIBLIB NDPNDP LIBLIBBurrardBurrard 1064610646 7975 7975 XXFraserviewFraserview 8774 8774 8394 8394 XXHastingsHastings 9894 9894 6345 6345 XXKensingtonKensington 9496 9496 7608 7608 XXKingswayKingsway 10525 10525 6997 6997 XXLangaraLangara 5515 5515 1103811038 XXLittleLittle MountainMountain 9390 9390 1203612036 XXMountMount PleasantPleasant 1115511155 4243 4243 XXPointPoint GreyGrey 11074 11074 1263712637 XXQuilchenaQuilchena 4977 4977 1550915509 XX
ALLALL 91446 91446 92782 92782 6 644
Wrong WinnersWrong Winners
NewfoundlandNewfoundland 19891989 Nova ScotiaNova Scotia 19701970 New BrunswickNew Brunswick 19741974 QuebecQuebec 1966, 19981966, 1998 OntarioOntario 19851985 ManitobaManitoba 19451945 SaskatchewanSaskatchewan 1986, 19991986, 1999 British ColumbiaBritish Columbia 19961996 CANADACANADA 1957, 19791957, 1979
Oversized Governments : Weak Oversized Governments : Weak OppositionsOppositions
Government vs Opposition in BC
0
20
40
60
80
100
%
Govt Seat Share Oppos Seat Share
Under-representation of Under-representation of WomenWomen
Women in the BC Legislature
0
50
100
1983 1986 1991 1996 2001
%
Women in Provincial Legislatures (2002)
0
20
40
60
80
100
BC AB SK MN ON PQ NB PEI NS NF
%
Women in National Legislatures
0 20 40 60 80 100
Japan
India
Italy
Ireland
USA
Israel
UK
CANADA
Mexico
Australia
NZ
Spain
Germany
Austria
Norway
Holland
Finland
Denmark
Sweden
%
electoral systemelectoral system % women in % women in national national legislaturelegislature
Plurality / MajorityPlurality / Majority 16.916.9
Mixed: constituency-Mixed: constituency-proportionalproportional
19.419.4
Proportional Proportional Representation (list)Representation (list)
29.529.5
Reform InitiativesReform Initiatives
PEI – PEI – Judge recommends change and BC-style Judge recommends change and BC-style citizens’ assembly!citizens’ assembly!
NB – Traditional commission with mandate for NB – Traditional commission with mandate for proportionality and local representationproportionality and local representation
PQ – Government to introduce BillPQ – Government to introduce Bill
ON – Planning ‘citizen juries’ and possibly a ON – Planning ‘citizen juries’ and possibly a referendumreferendum
YUK – Watching usYUK – Watching us
Some questionsSome questions
1.1. What lessons should we take from BC’s electoral What lessons should we take from BC’s electoral history?history?
2.2. Is vote equality an issue? How equal is equal?Is vote equality an issue? How equal is equal?
3.3. Are artificial majorities really bad?Are artificial majorities really bad?
4.4. If a party wins the most districts are they really If a party wins the most districts are they really wrong winners?wrong winners?
5.5. Is the under representation of women, or other Is the under representation of women, or other groups, an issue if members all vote the party groups, an issue if members all vote the party line once elected?line once elected?
6.6. Should there be proportional representation for Should there be proportional representation for social groups? If so which ones?social groups? If so which ones?