Instant-Runoff Voting: A Way to Save Canadian Democracy

Jonathan Owen- April 5th, 2023

Unfair, unrepresentative, and unstable are some of the many flaws of the Canadian electoral system. Voting is essential to democracy as it gives citizens a voice in
decisions that affect their lives. Canada’s democracy operates within a parliamentary
system of government designed to have representatives elected by citizens to express
their views and interests in government. The current “first-past-the-post” (FPTP) electoral
system has several flaws. Most prominently, the number of seats awarded to political
parties does not reflect the popular vote under FPTP, meaning that elected representativesmay not accurately reflect the electorate’s values and beliefs. However, instant-runoff voting (IRV) or alternate voting (AV) electoral systems provide a more accurate representation of the popular vote. The significance of a fair and representative voting system cannot be overstated, as it ensures that the government accurately reflects society’s beliefs, promoting stability and equality for all citizens. Thus, Instant-runoff voting (IRV) or alternate voting (AV) electoral systems best encapsulate the most
important values when choosing an electoral system: fairness, equality, and stability. This
paper contends that the current Canadian election system, FPTP, significantly impacts
election outcomes due to a lack of funding and resources for smaller parties. Such a
system results in an unequal playing field, low voter turnout, and government instability.
This essay suggests that instant-runoff voting (IRV) is the best solution as it is more
representative, fair, and stable, as demonstrated by successful examples such as Australia and Alaska.

IRV is a method of voting in which voters rank candidates in order of preference.
If no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the candidate who received the
fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed to the remaining candidates based on the voters’ next choice. The procedure is repeated until a candidate receives a majority of votes. First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) voting systems elect representatives in single-member constituencies. Voters cast ballots for a candidate of their choice, and the candidate with the most votes becomes the representative for that constituency. Regardless of whether candidates have a majority, the candidate who receives the most votes in a constituency wins the seat. FPTP is widely used in countries like the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States. The Canadian electoral system, as it stands, is unfair in its disproportionate representation of voters and seats allotted. In the June 2022 Ontario election, the Liberals got twenty-three-point eight percent (23.8%) of the votes but six-point-four percent (6.4%) of the seats. As a result, the Liberals did not get an official party status, depriving them of government resources and funding. The New Democratic Party (NDP) won twenty-three-point seven percent (23.7%) of the votes and twenty-five percent (25%) of the seats. Progressive Conservatives got forty-point-eight percent (40.8%) of the vote and sixty-seven percent (67%) of the seats. Similarly, in the Autumn of 2022, the Conservatives got about twelve-point nine percent (12.9%) of the vote after the Quebec provincial election and had no seats. The provincial Liberals and Quebec Solidaire parties got fourteen-point-four percent (14.4%) and fifteen-point-four percent (15.4%) of the vote, respectively. Still, the Liberals got twenty-one (21) seats and the Solidaire eleven (11) seats. The winning Coalition Avenir Quebec garnered forty-one percent (41%) of the vote but ninety (90) seats. The mismatch between votes and those elected is thus unequivocally evident. Eliminating the FPTP system and implementing an IRV system would result in the Liberals gaining more seats in Ontario and the Conservatives more in Quebec. Liberal and Conservative parties would then receive party status and, thus, government funding and resources. Using an instant runoff voting system in Canadian elections would result in a more accurate and fair representation of Canadian voters (Miller, 2014). Therefore, each party would receive the funding and resources they deserve, and no party would have an unfair advantage.

The lack of funding and resources significantly impacts the outcomes of elections.For example, modern political campaigns rely heavily on social media. Television, Instagram, Facebook, newspapers, etc., are crucial means of how parties can reach voters.Officials from the Conservatives, NDP, and Liberals have stated that the media is their primary audience and that the internet could supply journalists with up-to-date campaign news and event information (Small, 2008). However, without the proper funding and resources to produce high-quality social media ads and campaigns, smaller parties face another hurdle to overcome if they want a seat in the House. Big parties need not worry about financing their social media ambitions, for they already have government monies (Wiltse, 2019). The unfair relationship between parties and government money leads to an inequitable playing field for minor parties, especially regarding social media
campaigns.

The massive drop in voter turnout in recent Canadian elections has been a major
issue. Conservatives in Quebec and Liberals in Alberta are disinclined to vote because their parties are unlikely to elect many, if any, representatives. Participation in Canadian
federal elections fell from an average of seventy-five percent (75%) in the 1950s-70s to just over sixty percent (60%) from the 2000s onward. One can see that the current FPTP system is not promoting voter turnout. The current Canadian system, with its low voter turnout and preponderance of minority governments since 2004, indicates an unstable government (Heywood, 2019). When there is an increasing disconnect between rulers andthe ruled, there is a rising sense of instability. An electorate not reflected in its government will speculate on the efficacy of voting. When governments pass widely
disrespected laws, there is an increasing toll on the legitimacy of the government.
Something has to give (Birch, 2008). Currently, the Ontario government just rescinded its charter overriding labour legislation. The only reason this was done was the mounting massive rejection by the Ontario electorate. The Ontario government recognized it was risking its legitimacy by pursuing an increasingly discredited policy. Most Ontarians did not vote in the 2022 provincial election, with just forty-four percent (44%) voting, while a majority of those who did vote voted against the present administration. Despite a majority government, there is not a considerable amount of political goodwill that government can afford to dissipate. The government’s legitimacy and, therefore, stability is not that strong. In an IRV system, the incentive to get out and vote is compelling because even if one’s first choice does not make it to the last round, there is a good chance that one’s second or third choice will. As no one wins a riding without getting at least fifty percent (50%) of the vote, voters know their vote is likely to matter. There is a much greater incentive for everyone to vote when everyone knows their vote can make a difference in selecting the winner.

In IRV systems, there will likely be more Liberals elected in Alberta and Conservatives in Quebec. In places such as Simcoe County, the Liberals or NDP are more likely to win as their combined historic vote is usually more significant than the Conservative vote, which historically takes the ridings. With more seats being more competitive, political parties can attract higher quality candidates as they will have a better chance of winning. Better quality government is usually the result of electing better-quality members of parliament. There is more interest in and discussion about topics when everyone recognizes that every vote matters. Citizens become more engaged with voting. Most of the population then takes greater ownership in the electoral systems.There is less cynicism and disillusionment about politics. The intrinsic value of the IRV system will energize those Alberta Liberals and Quebec Conservatives to vote. With everyone voting for their beliefs, the government will have a more equal representation of the population. Equality is seen in the diversity of voices heard and members elected; such diversity leads back to creating equal laws, policies, and markets.

Some scholars argue that a pure proportionate representation (PR) system should be adopted. However, critics note that a PR parliament like the Israeli Knesset is notoriously unstable and short-lived. Thus, the question arises: how can one get a more
representative parliament while maintaining a stable government?

Instant-runoff voting is the best answer to solving those problems. IRV parliaments, such as the ones in Australia and Ireland, are far more representative than their FPTP peers and still last longer than the Italian and Israeli proportionate governments. Australia has a long history of using IRV to elect its legislative governmentdivision. As a result, it has had representation in its parliament that is broadly like that expected by plurality methods. Australian elections tend to be held every two (2) to three (3) years, thus enabling the government to implement the changes it campaigned for while simultaneously preventing any extremist party from controlling the government for a prolonged period. The Australian government’s election consistency indicates stability (Sanders, 2012). The possibility of creating an electoral system using IRV that is both fair and stable is evident. It is reasonable to assume that Canada could adopt such a system, given the similarities between the two (2).

A recent success story of IRV was in the August 2022 Alaskan House of Representatives election. On August 16, 2022, there was a special election for Alaska’s
sole U.S. House seat after the death of Don Young. The first round of voting had Mary
Peltola at thirty-six-point eight percent (36.8%) of the vote. In comparison, Republicans Sarah Palin and Nick Begich respectively got thirty-point-two percent (30.2%) and twenty-six-point two percent (26.2%) of the vote. The final vote resulted in Peltola getting fifty-one-point five percent (51.5%) and Palin getting forty-eight-point five
(48.5%) percent as large numbers of Republicans preferred the Democrat to Sarah Palin (Ballotpedia, 2022). The November 8th midterm elections, with eighty percent (80%) of the votes cast, had Democrat Mary Peltola leading with forty-seven-point two percent (47.2%) of the votes. By contrast, Republicans Sarah Palin and Nick Begich respectively
had twenty-six-point six percent (26.6%) and twenty-four-point two percent (24.2%) of
the vote (CNN, 2022). As per the October special election, it is expected that enough
Nick Begich voters will pick Mary Peltola as their second choice to put her over the top.
In a FPTP system, usually one (1) Republican candidate would have won. Yet IRV appears to have now twice facilitated the victory of a Democrat in what is generally a Republican state. IRV permitted Alaskans to elect a Democrat after fifty (50) years of Republican wins. All Alaskans now know their votes cannot be taken for granted. Every Alaskan’s vote now matters. The fact that the Democrats have won two (2) House elections in a row demonstrates consistency and stability in the outcome.

When selecting an electoral system, instant-runoff voting (IRV) or alternative voting (AV) electoral systems best encompass the essential values: fairness, equality, and
stability. The disproportionate and unfair ratio of seats issued and votes received highlights the flaws of the current FPTP system. In addition, the decline in voter turnout under the current FPTP system demonstrates the critical need for reform, which can be implemented with IRV. IRV also promotes equality by allowing for smaller parties to be successful, creating a platform for a more diverse group of voices to be heard. Finally, IRV makes for a more stable government by keeping the balance of not too much governmental change where nothing is accomplished but not so little change that
extremist or radical parties can hold power for long. Lord Acton famously said, “Power
tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Lord Acton, 2015). If Lord
Acton was correct, then using IRV would chip away at politicians’ and political parties’
stranglehold on areas that use the FPTP system.

References

August 16, 2022, election results. Ballotpedia. (n.d.). Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://ballotpedia.org/August_16,_2022,_election_results

Cable News Network. (n.d.). Alaska house district 1 midterm election results and maps 2022 | CNN politics. CNN. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/results/alaska/us-house-district-1

CBC/Radio Canada. (n.d.). Ontario election 2022 live results. CBCnews. Retrieved
November 10, 2022, from https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/ontario/2022/results/#/

CBC/Radio Canada. (n.d.). Quebec 2022 live election results. CBCnews. Retrieved
November 10, 2022, from
https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/quebec/2022/results/

Birch, S. (2008). Electoral institutions and popular confidence in electoral processes: A cross-national analysis. Electoral Studies, 27(2), 305–320.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2008.01.005

Heywood, Andrew. “Crisis and Anti-Politics.” Essay. In Politics, 5th ed., 460–61. London: RED GLOBE PRESS, 2019. Accessed October 19, 2022.Member, A. S. (2023, February 13). Lord Acton. Acton Institute. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://www.acton.org/research/lord-acton

Miller, N. R. (2014). The Alternative Vote and Coombs Rule versus First-Past-the-Post: a social choice analysis of simulated data based on English elections, 1992–2010. Public Choice, 158(3/4), 399–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-013-0067-9

Sanders, W. (2012). Norm Kelly, Directions in Australian Electoral Reform: Professionalism and Partisanship in Electoral Management [Review of Norm Kelly, Directions in Australian Electoral Reform: Professionalism and Partisanship in Electoral Management]. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 732–733. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2012.73298

Small, Tamara A. “Equal Access, Unequal Success — Major and Minor Canadian Parties
On the Net.” Party politics 14, no. 1 (2008): 51–70.

Wiltse, D. L., La Raja, R. J., & Apollonio, D. E. (2019). Typologies of Party Finance Systems: A Comparative Study of How Countries Regulate Party Finance and Their Institutional Foundations. Election Law Journal, 18(3), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2018.0493