Friday, September 23, 2016

Electoral Reform: Pure Proportional Representation

Much of the debate about a possible proportional system is centred around the idea that there would be some kind of nationwide list. This article is part of that. Frankly, that idea is nonsense. While there could well be some kind of national equalizing list, such as exists in places like Norway, the base proportional districts would be provincial in nature. This is in no small part because current constitutional arrangements demand it.

As such, I want to use this opportunity to examine the idea of "Pure PR" That is Proportional Representation without any locally elected members. This contrasts with MMP, which is Proportional Representation where people still elect a single local MP. Not many countries use Pure PR, and those that do tend to be smaller.

So what new ridings would we have? The answer to that is actually quite simple if you look at it. Proportional districts tend to be large to ensure proportionality. As such we can easily define the first 8 proportional districts.

Prince Edward Island - 4
Newfoundland - 7
New Brunswick - 10
Nova Scotia - 11
Saskatchewan - 14
Manitoba - 14
Alberta - 34
British Columbia - 42

Each of these provinces would have a single province-wide proportional district, and elect the same number of MPs as they currently do. Nothing about Proportional Representation prevents that, and in fact, nearly all proportional systems do things this way. The idea of a national list in Canada is absurd.

So what about the larger provinces? A proportional district with 121 members (Ontario) could be quite unwieldy. As such, we will be dividing up the larger provinces into smaller, more easily manageable chunks.

I've decided to use areas between 30 and 60 members large. As such, I present 2 maps, for Ontario and Quebec, divided into their new proportional districts.



For Quebec the division is perhaps most obvious. The Montreal area  is it's own district, while the rest of Quebec is also it's own district. Ontario is somewhat similar, but due to the population, three districts are needed rather than two. Toronto and it's neighbouring regions, York, Durham, and Peel, become a central riding, while the remainder of Ontario is divided into North East and South West.

Like my earlier post on STV, I want to examine what an election would look like under this system.

Using D'Hondt, we get the following results:

NL:
6 - LIB - 165,418
1 - NDP - 54,120
0 - CPC - 26,469
0 - GRN - 2,772

PEI:
3 - LIB - 51,002
1 - CPC - 16,900
0 - NDP - 14,006
0 - GRN - 5,281

NS:
7 - LIB - 324,816
2 - CPC - 93,697
2 - NDP - 85,468
0 - GRN - 17,630

NB:
6 - LIB - 227,764
2 - CPC - 112,070
2 - NDP - 81,105
0 - GRN - 20,551


Atlantic Subtotals:
22 LIB // 5 CPC // 5 NDP // 0 GRN


MB:
7 - LIB - 268,280
5 - CPC - 224,527
2 - NDP - 81,960
0 - GRN - 18,944

SK:
3 - LIB - 131,681
7 - CPC - 267,937
4 - NDP - 138,574
0 - GRN - 11,527

AB:
 9  - LIB - 473,416
21 - CPC - 1,150,101
 4 -  NDP - 224,800
 0 -  GRN - 48,742

BC:
15 - LIB - 829,816
13 - CPC - 708,010
11 - NDP - 615,156
 3 - GRN - 194,847


Western Subtotals:
34 LIB // 46 CPC // 21 NDP // 3 GRN


After which we get into Quebec

Greater Montreal Area:
17 - LIB - 881,148
 4  - CPC - 250,755
10 - NDP - 554,070
 8  -  BQ  - 445,006
 1  - GRN - 55,107

Rest of Quebec:
12 - LIB - 636,525
 9  - CPC - 456,638
10 - NDP - 521,296
 7  -  BQ  - 379,138
 0  - GRN - 40,288


Quebec Subtotal:
29 LIB // 13 CPC // 20 NDP // 15 BQ // 1 GRN


And into Ontario

North East Ontario:
15 - LIB - 835,201
12 - CPC - 633,213
 5 -  NDP - 304,078
 1 -  GRN - 62,853

South West Ontario:
15 - LIB - 809,235
14 - CPC - 801,147
 7 -  NDP - 405,389
 1  - GRN - 68,854

Greater Toronto Area:
26 - LIB - 1,286,957
17 - CPC - 865,033
 7 -  NDP - 376,449
 1 -  GRN - 54,285


Ontario Subtotal:
56 LIB // 43 CPC // 19 NDP // 3 GRN


Nationwide Total:
141 LIB // 107 CPC // 65 NDP // 15 BQ // 7 GRN // 3 from the Territories

You'll notice I didn't mention a threshold; that's because there is none. The size of the districts act as their own threshold. The largest one has 51 members which puts an effective threshold of around 2%. This means none of the parties last-time that did not win seats, would win seats under this new system.

Compare our result above to an absurd nationwide list:
135 LIB // 109 CPC // 67 NDP // 16 BQ // 11 GRN // 0 Libertarians

Despite the fact the Libertarians were the next most popular party, despite the fact I am using no threshold, they win 0 seats. In fact you'd need to expand the commons to 473 seats before they win a seat. You can check for yourself here. (presuming the link lasts)

One reason the Liberals do better under the regional system is how strongly they won the Atlantic, which is given more seats than its population would otherwise grant.


So what of this system? It's very unlikely we'd ever get it; given that it eliminates local representatives. However, in short, it would distribute seats based on the proportion of votes. That means an end to majorities.

There is not much more to say on it. I will, however, examine the other systems that are being looked at in posts in the coming days and weeks.

No comments:

Post a Comment