Themes from Consultation Meeting in Toronto Central

This is a summary of thoughts expressed by members of the public who attended this consultation meeting. If a point was made by more than one participant, it is included only once in the summary. The comments below sometimes contradict one another because they reflect the diversity of the viewpoints of participants.

Number of public participants: 200

Thoughts about Principles

Accountability

  • Ridings should be smaller so MPPs can get closer to the people.
  • No one doubts who is responsible for policies when there is a majority government.

Effective parties

  • It should be easier for smaller parties to win seats.

Fairness of representation

  • Public policy is better when a diversity of views is heard. The right of decision belongs to the majority, but the right of representation belongs to all.
  • All votes should count equally (one person, one vote.) All votes should count, regardless of the party they are for.
  • Results should be proportional. This is an essential principle; all other principles will follow.
  • Demographic representation is important. Women, Aboriginals, Francophones, and minorities need to be better represented.
  • We need more representation of women. Women have different perspectives than men on many issues (e.g. the use of force, gay rights, peace). I believe we’re 47th in the world in terms of representation of women.
  • Demographic representation will not be improved by changing the electoral system, because it’s not the cause of under-representation. To try to reflect all differences is to reinforce them.
  • We need to balance urban and rural interests.
  • Rural voters have too much power now. We should have strict representation by population (variances of only 5%).
  • We need local representation. MPPs’ offices are the entry point into the political process for many marginalized individuals. People want a local member.
  • The idea that ridings give us a local face that understands local issues is a romanticized idea of geographic representation.
  • Ontarians are used to local representation, but larger ridings could work. Community groups could take over MPP’s local advocacy roles.
  • Young people do not think about representation in a geographic way.

Legitimacy

  • Manufactured majorities [link to glossary] reduce legitimacy.
  • It does not matter to me if some MPPs or the government is elected with less than a majority.

Simplicity & practicality

  • Every voter should be able to understand the vote and the count.
  • A complicated system will be a barrier. Explaining it will be a challenge, because not all voters are literate in English or French.
  • Simplicity and practicality are important, but should not prevent change.

Stable & effective government

  • Stability depends more on economics and political culture than on the electoral system. Concerns about stability should not prevent change.
  • All systems have the ability to produce stable and effective governments.
  • Minority governments have to be very responsive to voters because they are always threatened with losing power. However, minorities can be stable.
  • Compromises (forced by minorities and coalitions) produce good government and better decision-making.

Stronger voter participation

  • People don’t vote because they think their votes don’t matter. If votes matter, people would be more involved in politics.
  • Voter participation is correlated with immigration status and socio-economic status. We need to work in marginalized communities (e.g. with new immigrants and public housing residents) to enable participation.
  • Young people are not voting because they are ignored by politicians. They are spread out across the province (i.e. they cannot influence results in any one riding) and their votes don’t count.

Voter choice

  • An electoral system should let people elect their first choice. There is no sense in reform if voters elect their second choice.
  • I’d rather have first choice, or fifth, than someone I really don’t want.
  • If every vote counts, we have more practical choice.
  • We need more choice. Voters should be able to vote for whatever viewpoint they support and have their vote count.
  • We should have preferential ballots to eliminate strategic voting. People should not be frightened by their worst nightmares; they should be allowed to dream.

Thoughts about Ontario’s Current Electoral System

Participants highlighted these advantages of First Past the Post:

  • In our system, we choose a specific person to represent us.
  • In our system, we select our representative as a community.
  • Our system strongly enforces accountability. No one doubts who is responsible for policies when there is a majority government. MPPs listen to everyone in their riding because they want to be re-elected.

Participants highlighted these disadvantages of the current system:

  • Our system disenfranchises groups who are not concentrated in a small region (e.g. supporters of the Greens, young people). It hides diversity within regions. (For example, there are many Conservative voters in downtown Toronto.)
  • Our system produces skewed results. It can produce false winners.
  • Our system produces manufactured majorities, which have 40% of the votes, 60% of the seats, 100% of the power, and can do whatever they want, often against the wishes of the majority of voters (e.g. free trade after the 1988 federal election.) The last time we had a true majority government was in 1937.
  • Our system produces huge ideological shifts at each election because of skewed results and false majorities.
  • Our system produces huge numbers of wasted votes. “Safe” ridings disenfranchise many voters.
  • There are many points of view and votes that are not represented in the legislature.
  • Our system makes it impossible for some groups (e.g. public housing residents) to have a voice.
  • In our system, there is a stunningly low number of women and minorities in parliament.
  • Our system is unfair to small parties.

Thoughts about Other Systems

Participants made these comments about other systems:

Majority systems

  • Majority systems (like Alternative Vote) produce a majority choice. This makes the process more legitimate.
  • They give voters more choice by allowing them to list their preferences.
  • Majority systems are used successfully in a number of countries.

Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)

  • MMP is a good compromise between our system and pure Proportional Representation. It provides some degree of proportionality without too much change, and preserves local representation. It is a simple way to get proportionality.
  • In MMP, there should not be too many regions. Small regions reduce proportionality.
  • In MMP, we should use a preferential ballot at the local level. This would produce a majority choice, which is more legitimate. I prefer Condorcet (which does pair-by-pair comparisons of candidates to produce a consensus winner), but Alternative Vote would be less complex and acceptable.
  • Deciding how to split your vote (on a two-vote ballot) in MMP is complicated.
  • Deciding how to set up an MMP system with regions is complicated.

Proportional Representation (PR) systems

  • PR treats each voter’s intentions equally. It represents voters’ choices in parliament.
  • PR empowers new parties and allows smaller ones to win seats.
  • PR would make parliament more effective by broadening the viewpoints represented in the opposition.
  • PR forces parties to negotiate and collaborate.
  • PR eliminates manufactured majorities.
  • PR would increase the number of women elected and increase demographic representation. It would be in parties’ interests to run diverse candidates.
  • PR alone will not ensure diversity. Parties must be willing to balance their lists (e.g. zippered lists). Any move towards PR must be matched with a move towards diversity.
  • PR would force parties to take notice of youth.
  • If we have PR with regions, regions must be large enough to fairly represent women and minorities.
  • Good proportionality requires a large district magnitude.
  • I believe some regions can be ignored under PR.
  • PR gives parties too much power over who runs. Candidates don’t need the support of the voters if they have the support of their party leadership.
  • PR is very adversarial. Small radical parties could have too much power.
  • In a pure PR system, urban interests will overrun rural interests.

Single Transferable Vote (STV)

  • STV would be better than MMP for women and other under-represented groups.
  • Voting in STV is simpler than in MMP. Preferential voting (in STV) is clear, but deciding how to split your vote (on a two-vote MMP ballot) is tricky.
  • In BC, people understood STV. It’s not too complicated.

Other Thoughts

If the Assembly recommends a new system

  • The referendum threshold is too high. It should be 50%.
  • If 60% vote for a new system, they will be thrilled to see it.
  • There should be a strong education campaign to make sure the proposal is understood.

Size of the legislature

  • If we can get better representation by adding more seats, we should.
  • We used to have 130 seats. If we followed the growth in population, the current number of seats would be 172.
  • We don’t have enough MPPs to do the jobs required of them.
  • Do not be afraid to increase the number of MPPs. Many legislatures function well with many more representatives. Since MPPs were cut, the number of unelected staff has grown.
  • Any system can work with any number of seats. The Assembly should stay focused on the electoral system (how votes translate into seats).

Other comments

  • We should consider the American system of primaries for party nominations. This would make the nomination process more open, and include the public in an earlier stage of the process.
  • Parties have too much control over who gets to run. Ordinary citizens should be able to be nominated and elected.
  • We should extend civic education and lower the voting age.
  • The law should be changed to allow the word “Independent” in party names. Otherwise our freedom of association is limited.
  • Francophones are being ghettoized in Ontario. The Assembly should allow Francophones to participate at all meetings.
  • Our expectations should not be too high. There are many things that electoral system reform will not cure.
  • We need more education of children and the voting public, to engage them in politics and the electoral process.
  • There are barriers in the system – it’s sexist, racist, and doesn’t motivate people to vote.

» Return to Summaries of Public Meetings