Did you know that in every Federal election over 1/2 of voters don’t elect And, a Party anyone?

that receives only 39% of the vote can win a Majority?

In 2015, over

9,000,000 voters cast ineffective ballots

A Case for Democracy It’s time to make EVERY vote count equally!

Fair Représentation Vote équitable Canada au Canada

Let’s Make All Our Votes Count Equally!

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 correlates strongly with lower income inequality, better environmental performance, and long-term goals that better respect the intentions of voters. (Lijphart, 2012). Proportional Representation is a unifying strategic goal. We want you to make all our votes count!

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

1

Due to a growing lack of power, Canadians are withdrawing from a political system that fails to represent them. In every Federal election, half – over 9,000,000 votes in 2015 - elect no one. Yet a government can claim 100% of the power with only 39% of the popular vote. 2015 Federal Election

2011 Federal Election

2

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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. Canadians are concerned 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. Feeling disempowered, Canadians are losing faith in a political system that fails to represent them. In the last Federal election, over 9,000,000 votes elected 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. Retaining local representation connected to a specific community is important to Canadians. A proportional representation system can be designed to retain and strengthen a Member of Parliaments accountability and local connection to their Constituents. A Made-in-Canada solution is possible. 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 every citizens.

3

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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, the majority of voters get ignored. 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 represent 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 voters! #voterequality 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.

4

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

•

It respects diversity and gives supporters of all parties representation even in a stronghold.

•

 hen voters are fully represented, they will find that government is more W 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 ineffective 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.

•

PR countries have 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:

5

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

•

 oter turnout was higher by 7.5 percentage points, when contextual factors are V taken into account.

•

Government policies were closer to the view of the average voter

•

 itizens were more satisfied with democracy, even when the party they voted C 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, naturally.

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. Canada needs climate solutions. Inaction will leave citizens dealing 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 longterm 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: •

 ountries with proportional systems scored six points higher on the C Environmental Performance Index, which measures these policy areas: environmental health; air quality; resource management; biodiversity and habitat; forestry; fisheries; agriculture and climate change.

6

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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.

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

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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.

Income Inequality

Lijphart (2012) found that: •

 ountries with proportional systems had significantly much lower C levels of income inequality.

Birchfield and Crepaz (1998) found that: •

 onsensual political institutions (which use proportional representation) C 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

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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% 43% 40% 39% 39% 37% 32% 26% 25% 23% 18%

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 hover around 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

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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 ineffective 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

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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 40 local teams and over 65,000 supporters who have signed our Declaration of Voters’ Rights. Fair Vote Canada is campaigning for a citizen-led consultation process supported by experts – 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, great Canadian thinkers and over 500 high-level Canadian Academics. 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, Dr. Henry Milner, The Hon. Lorne Nystrom, Dr. Sylvia Ostry, Stephen Owen,

11

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

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 have ALL 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: •

 onduct a citizen-led consultation process immediately following C 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

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

We believe in a true representative democracy, where all voters are equal, 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 was a watershed moment, and all of the pieces are in place: 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. Equal and effective votes are the foundation of representative democracy. Our campaign is stimulating a groundswell of Canadians calling for change. We are educating advocates through a informative campaign website, monthly webinars, the work of over 40 local action groups across the country, grassroots events and media outreach. We are collaborating with other civil society and likeminded groups to build the movement.

Making Every Vote Count Equally 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 growing a critical mass of Canadians calling for change. Pressure is mounting 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.

13

Fair Vote Canada —Case For Democracy

Canadians are calling on all of you to honour your commitment to Make Every Vote Count and to help us build a Country that is more inclusive and fair! We are asking you to lead and to put the Country and its Citizens before your Parties and build a representative Democracy where all Canadians have the opportunity to equally participate in the governance and policy making of our Country. We are asking you to build a Country where every Citizen is heard and where the diversity of our Country is respected. A country that we can proudly call Canadian. 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. Let’s Make All Our Votes Count Equally! With a lot of hope, Fair Vote Canada 408 - 283 Danforth Ave. Toronto, ON M4K 1N2 References ACE Electoral Knowledge Network (updated regularly on line). Encyclopaedia on Electoral Systems. http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/default Birchfield, Vicki and Crepaz, Markus (1998). “The Impact of Constitutional Structures and Collective and Competitive Veto Points on Income Inequality in Industrialized Democracies. European Journal of Political Research 34: 175–200. http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~iversen/PDFfiles/Birchfield&Crepaz1998.pdf Carey, John M. and Hix, Simon (2009). “The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low-magnitude Proportional Electoral Systems.” PSPE Working Paper 01-2009. Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. http://www.electoralreformforcanada.ca/2009%20Carey%20-%20Electoral%20 Sweet%20Spot.pdf Carey, John M. and Hix, Simon (2011). “The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low-magnitude Proportional Electoral Systems.” American Journal of Political Science 55-2: 383-397. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ j.1540-5907.2010.00495.x/epdf Cohen, Darcie (2010). “Do Political Preconditions Affect Environmental Outcomes? Exploring the Linkages Between Proportional Representation, Green parties and the Kyoto Protocol.” Simon Fraser University. http:// summit.sfu.ca/item/10084 Knutsen, Carl (2011). “Which Democracies Prosper? Electoral Rules, Forms of Government, and Economic Growth.” Electoral Studies 30: 83-90. http://www.sv.uio.no/isv/forskning/publikasjoner/artikler/chknutsen_ sciencedirect_2011.pdf Lijphart, Arend (2012). Patterns of Democracy. Government Forms and Performance in 36 Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale Press. Summary of 1999 edition: http://www.fairvote.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/LijphartSummary.pdf McDonald, M., Mendes, S. and Budge, I. (2004). “What are Elections for? Conferring the Median Mandate. British Journal of Political Science 34: 1-26, Cambridge University Press. http://cdp.binghamton.edu/papers/ What%20Are%20Elections%20For.pdf Pilon, Dennis. (2007). The Politics of Voting: Reforming Canada’s Electoral System. Toronto: Emond Montgomery. Verardi, Vincenzo (2005). “Electoral Systems and Income Inequality.” Economics Letters, 86-1: 7-12, January 2005.

14

Fair Vote Canada 408 - 283 Danforth Ave. Toronto, ON M4K 1N2 Welcome Package_Feb. 2016