Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Latest Election Results || Past Elections || Voter Turnout || Standings at Dissolution || Electoral Reform
based on the shares of the party vote in the combined single-member ridings for that district, and filled from
party lists. See the working document and the summary for an overview. In 2005, a special committee of
the National Assembly discussed the proposal and reiterated the desire for change, with agreeing on the
details. In late 2006, the Minister announced a further round of consultations with the Director General or
Elections and with members of the National Assembly. However, a provincial election ensued in March
2007 and no formal move had been undertaken to change the voting system by late 2007.
In Ontario, the government set up the Democratic Renewal Secretariat and proposed that elections be held
on a 4-year cycle starting with the first in October, 2007. As well, the government created a Citizens'
Assembly, similar to BC's, to examine electoral reform. 52 women and 51 men were selected and held a
number of sessions and public hearings between October 2006 and May 2007, when they released their
report recommending Ontario adopt a Mix-Member Proportional system. This recommendation was
rejected by over 63% of Ontarians who voted on a referendum question held in October 2007, at the same
time as the province's general elections only in 5 of the 107 ridings did a majority favour the new system.
In addition, a Citizens' Jury will examine election finance issues.
4. Many votes are wasted votes in SMP elections, which can discourage voters and lead to declining
turnout & general alienation. Since a candidate only needs one more vote than her or his opponents, the
winner's votes beyond that number are "wasted." Similarly, the votes for all the other candidates are wasted
in the sense that they do not help in electing other members of their parties.
5. Winning by a plurality undermines fairness because there are inconsistent targets to get elected. Many
second-place candidates win a greater share of votes in their ridings than do winning candidates in other
districts. In the 2015 federal election, for example, 31 second-placed candidates won over 40% of the vote
in their constituencies, while 72 MPs were elected with less than 40% of the vote - 23 of them with less
than a third of the votes.
strength of the STV is that voters can rank order the individual candidates - although the STV system used
for Australian Senate elections permits voters to simply mark their ballot in favour of a whole party rather
than have to mark individual candidates' names. As well, the size of the region from which members of the
legislatures are elected may be smaller than those used in party-list PR systems. STV is used in Ireland,
Malta, as well as for several state-level elections in Australia and for the Australian Senate elections
Germany and New Zealand are examples of countries that use some form of the mixed member
proportional (MMP) system. The idea is to use two different voting systems to elect members to the
legislature, with the goal of harnessing the virtues of both systems in the hopes of countering their
disadvantages. With MMP, some seats are contested in single-member districts while others are
apportioned to the parties on a basis of their share of the votes won. Voters are given two ballots - one for
the their choice of individual legislator, and another vote for their choice of party for the second set of seats.
In Germany and New Zealand, roughly half of the legislature is elected by single member plurality and the
other half is drawn from the party lists. The party list seats are allocated in a manner that provides a party
with a total share of all the seats in the legislature that is roughly proportional to their share of the party-list
vote. For example, if a party wins 30% of the party list votes but only 25% of the single-member seats, it
would be given enough party list seats to bring its total up to 30% of all the seats in the legislature. The
value of an MMP system is that it combines the local attachment of legislators to specific electoral
districts, with a legislature composed of parties roughly proportional to their share of the votes.
There are several variants of mixed member models, but the common factor is that two different systems
are used in parallel to elect members of the legislature. The relative portion of seats devoted to single
member elections and those chosen by PR can vary widely, as can the voting system used for the single
member seats. In addition, there may be different objectives for the supplementary seats assigned from the
party list. They may, as in the case of Germany & New Zealand, be distributed in a compensatory manner
to ensure the total share of seats a party wins (including the single-member & party list seats together) is
proportional to the party's share of votes. Or, the party list seats may be awarded simply according to their
proportion of those party votes the number of seats won by SMP would be irrelevant in this case. The party
list seats are viewed as purely supplementary in this model and not compensatory. This particular approach
is sometimes referred to as a mixed member majority (MMM) system, as it can (but need not) produce
majority governments when a party only wins a plurality of the vote. Whether or not a majority is produced
may depend on the portion of the legislature's seats set aside for supplementary allocation, party shares of
the vote, and the rules for their allocation.
There are many variations possible in mixed-member systems, including the proportion of the house which
is elected by each system (i.e. it could be a 75-25 split instead of 50-50). It should be noted that the singlemember ridings may also be elected by a majority system, such as the alternative vote, rather than SMP.
And, Taiwan uses STV for the first tier of seats, instead of a single-member system.
It is important to note that the models covered here do not exhaust the many possible ways of translating
votes into seats. For example, Italy's parliament has approved major changes to their electoral system,
which has been a pure party list system since 2005. Under the new system, voting would still be based on
an elector choosing one of the parties to vote for, and the initial distribution of seats is done on a
proportional basis from party lists. But there is a majoritarian bonus, given to a party that wins 40% or more
of the national vote: a total allocation of 340 seats out of the total 630. If no party wins 40%, a second
round of voting would be held. So, the Italians would have what one might describe as a PR, pluralitarianmajority, double-ballot system!
Resources on Electoral Systems
The now-disbanded Law Commission of Canada's archived electoral reform site provided a good range of
research papers on election issues, in addition to its final report.
Institute for Research on Public Policy has published some interesting material on electoral reform,
particularly in connection with its Governance Project. In addition, the July-August 2001 and September
1997 issues of Policy Options contains many articles debating the relative merits of reforming Canada's
electoral system. Broader discussions of elections are also found in Richard Johnson's Canadian Elections
at the Millennium (pdf) and in Paul Howe's and David Northrup's Strengthening Canadian Democracy: The
Views of Canadians.
The Australian Electoral Commission provides a good overview of all the different electoral systems which
includes a chart of which countries around the world use which system.
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance provides a detailed Handbook of
Electoral Systems Design.
Further useful information can also be found at:
Electoral Reform Society (UK)
Fair Vote Canada
New Zealand Mixed Member Plurality electoral system
New Zealand 2001 Parliamentary Inquiry into the MMP System (pdf)
UK Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System (Jenkins Report)
I welcome any feedback and suggestions for fresh material to add to this site - Send me an e-mail!
Andrew Heard
Political Science Department -- Simon Fraser university