A Case for Support A Case for Democracy

Did you know that in every Federal election over 1/2 of voters And, a Party don t elect that receives anyone? only 39% of the vote can win a Majority? That s over 7,000,000 wasted votes A Case for Support A Case for Democracy It s time to make EVERY vote count! Fair Vote Canada Représentation équitable au Canada

A Case For Support A Case for Democracy Citizens around the world are organizing, protesting, fighting and dying for the right to live in a democratic society. They demand a society where representatives strive to serve the best interests of the nation and deliver a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Sadly, as countries build and develop their systems of democracy, none are looking to Canada for a cutting-edge model of governing. Why would they? Canada s 12th-century winner-take-all electoral system fails to deliver on the basic promises of democracy: it produces distorted results, discounts close to half of all votes, produces regional polarization, strategic voting, adversarial politics, low voter turnout, suppresses minority views and creates barriers to electing more women and minorities. Just a few voters, in a few swing ridings, can determine the direction of a nation. Research shows that people in countries with Proportional Representation (PR) electoral systems have more power. PR results in lower income inequality, better environmental performance, and long-term goals that better respect the intentions of voters. Fair Vote Canada is showing Canadians that Proportional Representation is a unifying strategic goal. We are building the biggest, most hopeful campaign ever for PR. But, it will require a robust communications and outreach budget. 1

Due to a growing lack of power, Canadians are withdrawing from a political system that fails to represent them. In every Federal election, close to 7,000,000 votes elect no one. Yet a government can claim 100% of the power with only 39% of the popular vote. equals 10,000 votes Numbers from Elections Canada CANADA VOTES 2011 SEATS HOW WE VOTED WHAT WE RECEIVED 200 150 100 50 0 19 122 13 59 200 167 150 95 102 100 50 34 4 1 0 Bloc Con Gr Lib Ndp Bloc Con Gr Lib Ndp Conservative New Democratic Party Liberal Bloc Green 5,825,270 4,512,411 2,783,076 889,788 572,095 39.6% 30.6% 18.9% 6.1% 3.9% 2

One of the most distressing by-products of this system is that, due to this unfair imbalance, we are not working on the most pressing issues of our time climate change, income inequality, tax fairness. Parties benefit from the current winner-take-all voting system, but Canadians do not. If you live in Canada, you know that our democracy is in serious trouble. The symptoms are easy to spot: low voter turn-out with worryingly low levels among young people; staggering public apathy and indifference; a growing concentration of power in the PMO; hyper-partisanship and unrelenting party discipline. If this isn t enough to cause concern, the Federal Court has found in no uncertain terms that widespread election fraud took place during the 2011 federal election. Feeling disempowered, Canadians are losing faith in a political system that fails to represent them. In every Federal election, close to 7,000,000 votes elect no one. Yet a government can claim 100% majority power with less than 40% of the popular vote. Canada is one of only three OECD countries still using the antiquated winnertake-all system. Eighty-five percent of OECD countries use voting systems based on the principle of Proportional Representation in which supporters of all political parties are represented in the legislature in proportion to votes cast. For instance, if 30% of the voters give their support to a party, that party gets 30% of the seats in the legislature. An element of local representation is part of every Proportional Representation model recommended for Canada. Retaining local representation is important to Canadians. With PR, rural and urban voters in every province, territory and regional community will have effective votes and fair representation in both government and opposition. The problem is more than votes on a ballot it s about democracy and how a government responds to the will of the people and nurtures a relationship with civil society. 3

It s hard not to get discouraged in the current climate but we have a solution. Fair and equitable voting is a founding principle of democracy. Fair Vote Canada believes the time is ripe to change our electoral system to make every vote count, as a precondition for progress on all issues. To gain seats under our current system, politicians are compelled to focus on a few voters in a few swing ridings. Come election time, they ignore the majority of voters. The winning party then spends its tenure appeasing its base supporters and undoing the work of the previous government. This is called policy lurch and it is a characteristic of winner-take-all systems such as ours. When you make all votes count with Proportional Representation, you eliminate the focus on swing ridings and provide an environment for politicians to focus on long term goals built on respect, compromise and inclusion. When relatively small changes in poll numbers spell the difference between oblivion and absolute power, it s no wonder our politicians seem to be in perpetual, confrontational campaign mode. With Proportional Representation, a 2% change in the polls would mean just a 2% change in seats. Politicians would have an incentive to get down to work on our country s long-term priorities, rather than playing gotcha to tweak the poll numbers and gamble on yet another election. Research shows that when governments represent ALL voters they work together to develop long-term goals that better respect voter intentions. Governments are accountable to voters when they are accountable to legislators representing a true majority of voters. Proportional Representation would change the dynamic of government and produce a system based on cooperation and compromise, rather than confrontation and instability. Time for a Game Changer that respects all votes: #PR2015 The research is clear PR changes the dynamics in politics: It makes politicians work together, rather than trying to discredit each other. It will encourage citizens to make a positive choice by voting for the candidate or party they prefer: voters would no longer find it necessary to embrace negative or strategic voting by voting for a less-preferred candidate to block the election of one even less preferred. It gives supporters of all parties representation even when they are a local minority in an opponent s stronghold. 4

When voters are fully represented, they will find that government is more accountable to them and this will encourage greater voter engagement. It makes representation available to supporters of third parties providing they can persuade enough Canadians to vote for them and can pass a threshold deemed appropriate by Canadians. It gives rise to very few wasted votes. Almost all votes cast in PR elections go towards electing a candidate of choice. Voters see that the trip to the polling booth at election time is worthwhile and voters are more confident that their vote will make a difference to the election outcome. It eliminates the concentration of power in any one party, providing MPs with more autonomy. It leads to greater policy continuity and stability, and rewards good policy. West European experience suggests that parliamentary PR systems score better with regard to governmental longevity, voter participation, and economic performance. The rationale behind this claim is that regular switches in government between two ideologically polarized parties, as can happen in winner-take-all systems, makes long-term economic planning more difficult, while broad PR coalition governments lead to stability and coherence in decision making which allow for national development. There will be less corruption and less conflict. Measures of Democracy In addition to changing political culture, making all votes count, and delivering fair, representative election results, PR outperforms winner-take-all systems on measures of democracy and a country s quality of life. There is a strong correlation between PR and voter satisfaction, lower income inequality, better environmental outcomes, political stability, higher voter turnout, and higher economic growth. Arend Lijphart (2012), a world-renowned political scientist, spent his career studying the differences between majoritarian (winner-take-all) and consensual (PR) democracies. In his landmark study - Patterns of Democracy - he compared 36 democracies over 29 years and found that in countries using proportional systems: Voter turnout was higher by 7.5 percentage points, when contextual factors are taken into account. 5

Government policies were closer to the view of the average voter Citizens were more satisfied with democracy, even when the party they voted for was not in power There was only a marginal increase in the number of parties in Parliament On average, 8% more women were elected Proportional electoral systems deliver results for voters. When votes count, people have more power, and policies reflect what voters want. Environment Around the world citizens are desperately calling on governments to deal with the oncoming climate crisis. They are looking for leadership and asking politicians to develop policies that steer our economies in a direction that is less carbon-intensive and fosters prosperity while protecting the environment. The National Roundtable on Environment and Economy, and more recently the Global Commission on Environment and Climate, have shown us that we can build strong economies while reducing climate pollution. In Canada, we have seen complete inaction on climate change. This will leave citizens deaing with economic fallout as we experience the impacts of extreme weather catastrophes. We need a government that can work collaboratively with all parties to take action and develop long-term planning to deal with these issues. Governments elected under winner-take-all tend to be myopic and lack imagination and foresight due to the demands of a constant election cycle. Our system does not reward parties for long-term planning beyond the next election cycle. Protecting each party s fiefdom has become more important than developing long-term, progressive policy. We know that governments elected under Proportional Representation do much better on climate change. Arend Lijphart (2012), found that: Countries with proportional systems scored six points higher on the Environmental Performance Index, which measures these policy areas: environmental health; air quality; resource management; biodiversity and habitat; forestry; fisheries; agriculture and climate change. 6

I think it (proportional representation) would help break down the divisions in our country, and break down some of the deadlock we ve seen on some of the important environmental issues over the past few years. Rick Smith, ED Broadbent Institute Former ED Environmental Defence Canada environment Darcie Cohen (2010) found that: Countries with proportional systems were faster to ratify the Kyoto protocol In countries with a form of PR, the percentage of world total carbon emissions decreased, While it increased or remained unchanged in other countries. Income Inequality To quote the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives by 1:11pm on January 2, the first official working day of the year, Canada s top 100 CEOs have already pocketed $46,634 what it takes the average Canadian an entire year, working full-time, to earn. And while the rich continue to amass wealth, middle and lower wage earners struggle to make a living wage. Older workers find themselves having to work longer before they can retire and one in five minimum wage workers end up in a food bank every month in Canada. We can point to a range of studies that suggest there is a correlation between income inequality and health and social problems. So, how would changing the voting system impact growing income inequality? 7

When we have an electoral system that is not representative of the way the population actually voted, we get too much power residing in parties that are not accountable to the people and who are too tightly aligned with the interest of the wealthy. Maude Barlow, National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians income inequality Lijphart (2012) found that: Countries with proportional systems had significantly much lower levels of income inequality. Birchfield and Crepaz (1998) found that: Consensual political institutions (which use proportional representation) tend to reduce income inequalities whereas majoritarian institutions have the opposite effect. What made the difference was that people in countries with PR had more power. The more widespread the access to political institutions, and the more representative the political system, the more citizens will take part in the political process to change it in their favour which will manifest itself, among other things, in lower income inequality. Such consensual political institutions make the government more responsive to the demands of a wider range of citizens. 8

Inter-Parliamentary Union ranks: national parliaments of major democracies according to percentages of women elected Sweden PR Finland PR Norway PR Denmark PR Netherlands PR Germany PR New Zealand PR Australia AV Canada FPTP United Kingdom FPTP U.S.A. FPTP 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 45% 26% 25% 23% 18% 40% 39% 39% 37% 32% 43% PR - Proportional Representation FPTP - First Past The Post Women and Minorities. The U.N. says women need a critical mass of at least 33% representation in order for their voices to be heard. In Canada, women comprise 52% of our population yet under our system they get less than 25% representation. Many men would not be happy with a body of 75% women deciding on issues most critical to them. Is it fair that a body consisting of 75% men decides on issues of childcare and other issues of particular interest to women? In his study Patterns of Democracy Lijphart found that countries using proportional systems elected 8% more women to parliament than majoritarian (winner-take-all) systems. He elaborates that the representation of women in parliaments and cabinets is an important measure of the quality of democratic representation in their own right, and it can also serve as an indirect proxy of how well minorities are represented generally. Lijphart sums it up best when he says, Political equality is a basic goal of democracy and the degree of political equality is therefore an important indicator of democratic quality 9

Voting Systems are not equal. There are two basic families of voting systems: 1) Winner-take-all Systems Political scientists refer to winner-take-all systems as majoritarian. This includes our current First Past the Post system and instant-runoff systems like the Alternative Vote. The defining feature of these systems is that they use single-member ridings exclusively and are based on the idea that the largest group of voters in each riding elects a representative. Winner-take-all systems are designed to produce single party majority governments, in which one party tends to win more than half the seats and all the decision-making power. In Canada, the most common result is to elect false majorities in which the winning party wins a majority of seats with less than 50% of the popular vote. All winner-take-all systems share the same basic flaws: a high percentage of wasted votes, distorted overall results in which the seats earned do not reflect the popular vote, suppression of minority viewpoints, evolution towards a two-party system, legislatures which do not accurately reflect the diversity of the country and adversarial politics focused on small brand differences and strategic voting. 2) Proportional Representation. PR systems include Mixed Member Proportional, Single Transferable Vote and List PR with variations of each in different countries. Proportional representation systems are designed to produce legislatures that are representative of the views of citizens, based on the principle that the percentage of voters who vote for a party should match the percentage of MPs they elect. Because a single party rarely earns more than 50% of the vote, two or more parties usually govern as a coalition, thus representing a genuine majority of voters. Working together is a Canadian Value. Don t we need a majority to get things done? There is no evidence that countries with a PR system are dysfunctional. Indeed the opposite appears to be true and some of the best governed countries in the world - Germany and the Nordic countries for example - have PR systems. Meanwhile, some of the worst governed countries in the world have winner-take-all-systems. 10

Nor are PR systems inherently more unstable that winner-take-all systems. While Italy is often cited by opponents of PR for its purported instability, Italy s government has been more stable that it first appears since most of the changes cited were more like cabinet shuffles than wholesale changes of government. Since Italy reformed its voting system in the 1990s, it is actually Canada that now heads the list as the most unstable of the major democracies, with twenty-one elections since World War II to Italy s eighteen. Because of our voting system, we keep flip-flopping between false majority governments and unstable minorities at the expense of sound and stable policies that will address our country s long-term needs and priorities. Who is Fair Vote Canada? Fair Vote Canada is a national, multi-partisan, grassroots citizens organization advocating for Proportional Representation. We support PR at all levels of government: federal, provincial, and municipal. We have over 30 local teams and over 45,000 supporters who have signed our Declaration of Voters Rights. Fair Vote Canada is campaigning for a citizen-led consultation process supported by experts following the 2015 federal election to propose a model of PR that is best suited for Canada, given our country s size, diversity and political traditions. The campaign calls for implementation of that model in time for the next federal election post-2015. The movement is growing at a rapid pace with new supporters coming on board daily. This tells us that the campaign we launched in September 2013 to Make 2015 the Last Unfair Election - Make Every Vote Count is resonating with Canadians. In addition to our growing list of supporters, Fair Vote Canada is supported by several notable organizations and a large advisory group comprised of respected politicians and great Canadian thinkers. Our group of advisors include: Rick Anderson, Dr. Lloyd Axworthy, Dr. Patricia Baird, Maude Barlow, Dr. Sylvia Bashevkin, Robert Bateman, Dr. Marie Bountrogianni, Patrick Boyer, Ed Broadbent, Nathalie Des Rosiers, Linda Silver Dranoff, Dr. Phyllis Grosskurth, Jim Harris, Mel Hurtig, Dr. Vincent Lemieux, Rafe Mair, Robin Mathews, Audrey McLaughlin, 11

Dr. Henry Milner, The Hon. Lorne Nystrom, Dr. Sylvia Ostry, Stephen Owen, Dr. Dennis Pilon, Walter Pitman, Bob Rae, Judy Rebick, Walter Robinson, Dr. Norman Ruff, Sen. Nancy Ruth, Rick Salutin, Sen. Hugh Segal, David Suzuki, Dr. John Trent, Ted White, Rev. Hon. Lois Wilson. Ten Canadian Commissions, Assemblies and Reports that have recommended proportional representation The reason that polls consistently show that over 70% of Canadians support moving toward an element of proportionality in our voting system is the weight of expert evidence that has been put forward. Ten different Commissions, Assemblies and Reports in the past eleven years have unanimously recommended it. (http://www.fairvote.ca/reports/). Fair Vote Canada thinks we have studied the issue long enough. It s time for action. Through our Declaration of Voters Rights, Fair Vote Canada is asking Canadians, including politicians, to join us in calling for fair elections.. The Ask To determine the best model of Proportional Representation for Canada, where all MPs have faced the voters and will be accountable to voters, we call on federal parties and candidates to commit to: Conduct a citizen-led consultation process immediately following the next federal election Implement the chosen proportional representation model in time for the next federal election after 2015. Strategy and Direction Fair Vote Canada s campaign to make 2015 the last unfair election spells it all out it explains why Every Vote Should Count and how PR will create the solid foundation we need to deal with the most important issues of our time climate change, income inequality, a stable economy and fair representation for women and minorities. 12

We believe in a true representative democracy, where all voters are represented and able to influence the policies of the country. It s time for a system where all first choices count and political parties are allocated seats in proportion to their share of the vote. It s time for Canada to become truly democratic! The 2015 election is a watershed moment, and all of the pieces are there: the support of our advisory board, of other notable individuals and from other groups; the wealth of research backing up the case for PR; public opinion polls that show 70% support for PR among the general public and increased dissatisfaction with the quality of Canada s democracy. Canadians are starting to realize that electoral reform is at the core of building a true democracy. Fair elections are the foundation of representative democracy. Our 2015 campaign is designed to stimulate a groundswell of Canadians calling for change. We are educating advocates through a well-thought-out campaign website, monthly webinars, the work of over 30 local action groups across the country, grassroots events and media outreach. We are collaborating with other civil society and like-minded groups to build the movement. Where do the parties stand? Both the New Democratic Party and the Green Party have agreed to make Proportional Representation a key issue in the 2015 election and the Liberals are moving in the right direction. In February, 2014, the Liberals passed a priority resolution designed by caucus that immediately after the next election an all-party process be instituted, involving expert assistance and citizen participation, to report to Parliament within 12 months with recommendations for electoral reforms including, without limitation, a preferential ballot and/or a form of proportional representation, to represent Canadians more fairly and serve Canada better And we know there is a lot of support for making all votes count within the grassroots of the Liberal party. Some politicians have endorsed preferential/ ranked ballots (AV - Alternative Vote) - which involves preferential voting and instant runoffs in single-member ridings - another winner-take-all system that encourages a two-party race, favours centrists, and is designed to produce manufactured majorities. 13

In 2015, we will be working with key allies calling on voters to support pro-proportional representation candidates so we can fix our broken democracy and build a better Canada. The movement is growing but we can t do it alone. An investment in Democracy is a strategic goal that will help us all! We cannot change the system without support from our politicians yet even those who prefer PR often change their tune when they get in positions of power. We are reminded that even Stephen Harper, circa 1996, recommended PR in his paper called Our benign dictatorship. In order to change the system, we are focused on growing a critical mass of Canadians calling for change. It will take pressure from all corners of Canada. Our movement to bring accountability to all levels of government will be the biggest democratic reform since women got the vote. We re on our way but we need your help! Proportional Representation is a unifying strategic goal for all Canadians. Our plan will require a robust communications and outreach budget. We hope you will take time to understand the potential of this campaign and commit to building a better Canada together now and for generations to come. With a lot of hope, Fair Vote Canada 408-283 Danforth Ave. Toronto, ON M4K 1N2 14 Case For Support Case For Democracy

Fair Vote Canada 408-283 Danforth Ave. Toronto, ON M4K 1N2 Nov. 2014