Prescription: Ranked ballots for Toronto, proportionality for Parliament

[cross-posted from the Toronto Star]

Ontario’s non-stop election marathon is over. During the last 18 months, we’ve elected our provincial government, local city councils and a new federal government.

This rare alignment gives voters an unusually long break before the next round of elections, an electoral holiday providing us with an opportunity to step back and explore opportunities to improve our democracy.

Canada has the dubious distinction of being the only OECD country using first-past-the-post universally for all elections (local, provincial and federal). It’s a system that works fine for a two-candidate race, but in a multi-party system it completely breaks down. That’s why the Liberal Party won 54 per cent of the seats in our new Parliament, even though only 39 per cent of Canadians voted for them. And that’s why so few western democracies use it.

Consensus is slowly building that our current system has to go. The question is, which system do we replace it with? There’s no simple answer and there’s no one-size-fits-all solution.

Here in Toronto, with a non-partisan council, there’s a groundswell of support for a simple ranked ballot. Also known as a preferential ballot, this much-needed reform would allow us to hold an “instant runoff” in each ward, where the winner is required to win 50 per cent of the vote. Currently, candidates are “winning” their local races with results as low as 17 per cent, which arguably defeats the whole point of having an election. Local campaigns are increasingly divisive, voters are encouraged to vote “strategically,” and we repeatedly elect councils that don’t reflect the diversity of Toronto.

Meanwhile, cities across the U.S. using ranked ballots are experiencing friendlier campaigns, more accurate results, the freedom to “vote with your heart,” and a measurable increase in diversity and representation. It’s the right reform for Toronto and will hopefully be in place for 2018.

But while a simple ranked ballot is an important step forward for Toronto, there’s one important thing that it doesn’t deliver: proportionality. For our federal party-based elections, the need for proportional representation (PR) is crucial. The concept behind PR is simple: If you win 20 per cent of the popular vote, you should end up with 20 per cent of the seats.

Ranked ballots can produce proportional results, but only when they’re used in multi-member districts where you have four or five MPs per riding (this is called the Single Transferable Vote, or STV). But a ranked ballot in single-winner ridings does not deliver proportionality. In fact, a recent report by the Broadbent Institute predicts that under a simple ranked ballot, the Liberals would likely have won an additional 33 seats, distorting their majority even further.

Clearly, that’s not the answer for Canada. That’s why a growing chorus of national organizations and community leaders are calling for proportional elections.

Cynics and opponents of PR will stoke fears of unstable governments and fringe parties gaining power. They’ll offer Italy and Israel as nightmare examples of what PR can produce. But they’ll neglect to mention that almost every European country uses some form of PR, including some of the most stable governments in the world.

The World Economic Forum ranks Switzerland, Finland, Germany and Holland as the top four competitive economies in Europe. All four use PR, as do Sweden, Norway, Australia, New Zealand and 86 other countries.

PR also delivers governments that are more diverse and representative. For example, Canada ranks low when it comes to representation of women in the legislature, at 26 per cent. Meanwhile, all the top-ranking countries (Sweden at 45 per cent, Finland at 43 per cent, etc.) use PR.

Change is in the air. At the local level, the Wynne government is introducing historic legislation allowing any city in Ontario to use a ranked ballot, either in single-member wards or as multi-member STV.

Federally, Justin Trudeau has pledged that “2015 will be the last election under first-past-the-post.” This is good news, but he would be mistaken to think that the introduction of a ranked ballot alone will fix Canada’s democratic deficit. Only a proportional system will deliver a House of Commons that reflects the desires and diversity of Canada’s voters.

Our marathon of elections is over: provincial, municipal and federal. All three used first-past-the-post and all three were highly divisive and delivered distorted results. Now is the time to talk about how we can make the next round of elections as fair, friendly and proportional as possible. Voters deserve nothing less.

Advertisement

Op-ed: Transit funding and beer

…
Here’s my latest op-ed, about how we can build financial support for transit expansion, by celebrating the shovels (and machines) that are already in the ground.

(Cross-posted from the Star, March 1)

(Also, here’s a great follow-up from TTC Chair Karen Stintz, March 5)

_______________________________________________________________
Toronto STAR: Building support for Toronto transit expansion

After years of political bickering and setbacks, there seems to be a renewed sense of optimism about public transit in Toronto. Major outreach campaigns have been launched across the region. Metrolinx recently hosted public roundtable discussions, Toronto City Hall has announced a transit consultation process and Civic Action is running a campaign asking commuters how they would spend an extra 32 minutes a day – if transit was more efficient. Each project has similar goals: to seek input on future transit planning and help build public support for new revenue sources required to implement the province’s regional transit plan, The Big Move.

The campaigns are clever and effective, but if we want to get people really excited about building transit perhaps there are lessons we can learn from an entirely different Big Move.

STAR: Why fair debates matter in Ontario

…
This is an op-ed I wrote for the Toronto Star.  Read the original version here.
___________________________________________________

As a teenager, I would occasionally become enthralled by televised sports. I wasn’t particularly interested in wrestling matches or hockey playoffs, but my eyes would be glued to the screen for hours as I watched a true blood sport: elections.

I remember watching poll results late into the evening with my father and I recall being particularly fascinated by leadership conventions. It was amazing to me that political control was decided not in a backroom, but live on TV.

During one of those conventions I became so impressed with a particular candidate that I pinned his election sign to my bedroom wall, hanging between posters of Pink Floyd and Def Leppard.

I tend to lean to the left side of the political spectrum but this election sign did not belong to Broadbent, Clinton or Rae. My political hero was Garth Turner, a leadership candidate for the Tories in 1993 – my last year of high school.

Kites and Bikes: Two approaches at city hall

This op-ed appeared in the Toronto Star on July 11th.  I’ve included the amazing illustration by Lola Landekic, which was not included in the Star’s online version of the piece. I’ve also included a short update at the bottom.

One year ago, a slow summer afternoon was interrupted by a stream of unexpected phone calls. New signs had been installed in Scarborough’s Milliken Park stating “No kite flying allowed” and as the official spokesperson of the Toronto Kite Fliers Association, journalists were calling me for a quote.

The kite ban was an exaggerated response to genuine safety concerns that had been raised about the growing sport of “kite fighting” and the abrasive strings used by competitors. Most kite flying is completely harmless and the ban unfairly punished the majority who were flying safely. My initial comments were not positive in tone.