In theory, proportional representation is a good system. In reality, it is overly complex and gives way too much power to very small parties because of constant jockeying and minority governments.
In reality, it works so well that most democracies have adopted it -- and they tend to score well in every metric of a country's political health that I've seen so far, from the EIU, V-Dem favored by political scientists, @anticorruption.bsky.social, Heritage, Cato, Chandler Good Governance, etc.
Look at the reality of how those governments work. It is a rare event where one party gets a majority. MMP results in a disproportional amount of power to small fringe parties. Do you really want the deciding vote on something held by the ultra-right PPC or the ultra-left Communist Party of Canada?
PR results in *proportional* amounts of power to both large moderate parties and small fringe parties. If you get 60% of the vote, you only get 60% of the seats (instead of 100%). If you get 40%, you get 40% (instead of 0%).
Contrast the far right's strength in the US with Germany.
In Germany, the far right has more seats than other parties but cannot govern without other coalition members, none of which are willing to join it due to its extreme views.
In the US, the far right only needed a plurality of votes to gain majority power in all three branches of government. (2/2)
The Americans do not have a first past the post system. Their votes tell the state legislators which way they would like the State's electoral college votes to be used.
As for Germany, getting things done is like herding cats. Look at how long it took them to sort things out after the election.
In Canada, 48% of the adult population lacks functional literacy skills. And you want them to participate in an overly complex advanced voting system when they have issues with making an informed judgment on the political material they consume? Sure...
I can tell we're not going anywhere here but I'll tell you that the irresponsibility of the "illiterate masses" was one of the main arguments for a limited suffrage in the past.
If democracy is going to survive the social media age, we need to encourage more thinking, not less.
My worry is that they come up with something that gives smaller populations more power. I get that small rural places in Alberta and sask feel like they don't have a lot of sway, but i don't think it evens things out to give them more power just because they're smaller.
Proportional Representation would give more opportunity to smaller parties. FPTP causes the dichotomy where you have to vote Liberal to counter the Conservatives. It would allow smaller parties to shove out the larger parties stranglehold on everything.
Electoral reform could result in more representative government
For truly representative PR, equal riding sizes are key. Every vote must have equal weight or reform will simply create different inequalities. Special clauses undermine this.
Comments
Contrast the far right's strength in the US with Germany.
(1/2)
In the US, the far right only needed a plurality of votes to gain majority power in all three branches of government. (2/2)
As for Germany, getting things done is like herding cats. Look at how long it took them to sort things out after the election.
Is there really something that makes us less capable and discerning than the citizens of just about every other democratic country?
https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/adult-literacy-rate-low-skills-aspx/
If democracy is going to survive the social media age, we need to encourage more thinking, not less.
Make the Canadian government reform the voting system. They've promised proportional representation to Canadians for over 100 years!
For truly representative PR, equal riding sizes are key. Every vote must have equal weight or reform will simply create different inequalities. Special clauses undermine this.