What do you think?
Rate this book
Should We Change How We Vote?: Evaluating Canada’s Electoral System
During the 2015 federal election, the Liberals pledged that this past election would be the last vote held under the current electoral system. In a move towards making good on that promise, Democratic Reform Minister Maryam Monsef announced a parliamentary committee tasked with evaluating alternative electoral systems, in light of a number of “guiding principles.” This has generated a great deal of debate spanning issues from the composition of the committee to demands that the entire reform proposal be put to a referendum. The editors' view is that the shared premise of the entire debate -- that first-pass-the-post is obsolete, unrepresentative, and even undemocratic -- needs to be challenged. Before we set about changing our electoral system, we should at least make sure we understand the one we have: How it works, its flaws but also its advantages, the legitimacy of change without a referendum, and, finally, whether there is lower hanging fruit worth looking at. Are there changes we can make to the functioning of our democracy that are easier to make, and less disruptive, than overhauling the electoral system?
- GenresPoliticsNonfiction
230 pages, Paperback
Published April 10, 2017
2 people are currently reading
54 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
January 22, 2025
As Canada prepares for some turbulent times south of the border, it would be remiss not to talk about some of the political fallout within our own borders as well. An election is sure to occur by October 2025 and I wanted to do a little Election Prep for Canada, as I have done for US presidential elections in years past. We have a prime minister who has resigned due to some really poor polling numbers and a salivating Leader of the Opposition wanting to topple the tower right away for his own benefit. This entire experience could be extra fun, as there are whispers from on high in Washington that the upcoming election could be the last for Canada as a sovereign country before we become the 51st state. Let’s see where this reading journey takes us!
As Canadians head to the polls to cast ballots for their federal representatives, I thought it apt to take some time and sharpen my mind with an academic discussion of voting in Canada. This book is a collaborative effort and amassed a number of short essays on voting in Canada, presented at two conferences in the fall of 2016. While the discussion is robust, the attentive reader will not find a definitive decision within, but rather the theme that many speak of electoral reform, but no one can clearly take the leap. While strong on the ‘academic flavour’ it is a good read for those with a passion for the subject.
The impetus for such a book (and the essays within) came from a 2015 campaign promise by the Liberal Party of Canada that, should they win, it would be the final election fought under Single-Member Plurality (‘first part the post’ in the vernacular). However, as soon as the party ascended to power, they completed a half-hearted effort before shelving it. While discussion surrounding electoral change is nothing new in Canada, actual serious consideration at a legislative level has been far from resonating.
The collection of essays within explore the current electoral system used in Canada, while also touching on many of the alternatives, most popularly Proportional Representation, Single Transferable Vote, and Alternate Vote. So as not to cause readers of the review to suffer severe eye glazing, I will not delve into the specifics, but I surmise that many who enjoy this type of reading will know the systems well.
Arguments surrounding the feasibility or desirability of changing from our current system are plentiful, with some academics exploring that there is more to the discussion than simple ‘fairness for all’. Constitutional discussions arise, as do those about how ‘fair’ and stable an alternative might be to creating a government that could serve effectively and keep Canada on track. While this area of Canadian politics has long been something I enjoyed, new and intriguing discussions arose, making me think again about some of my foundational thoughts about electoral reform.
The collection is a great cross-section of thoughts, ideas, and perspectives when it comes to elections in Canada and the need for reform. Nothing is entirely clear-cut, especially in a country as diverse and cleaved as Canada. While the country strives for strong, majority governments, there is something to be said for those who must rely on the support of other parties, ensuring a larger support base across the country.
At the time of posting this review during my first reading of the book, Canada awaited news of its 2021 General Election, with the likelihood of another minority Parliament (it happened). I sat, working at one of the polling stations, where single-member plurality was used. I continued to follow the discussion on electoral reform at all levels of government and keenly read about many of the options and possibilities that arise. Democracy at its best when people can cast a ballot, even if some feel certain ballots offer a muted result. If you have not fallen asleep reading this yet, you likely know to what I refer.
Kudos, contributors of all stripes, for opening my eyes to all the possibilities when it comes to electoral reform in Canada. I’m sure the discussion will be long, divisive, and varied.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
As Canadians head to the polls to cast ballots for their federal representatives, I thought it apt to take some time and sharpen my mind with an academic discussion of voting in Canada. This book is a collaborative effort and amassed a number of short essays on voting in Canada, presented at two conferences in the fall of 2016. While the discussion is robust, the attentive reader will not find a definitive decision within, but rather the theme that many speak of electoral reform, but no one can clearly take the leap. While strong on the ‘academic flavour’ it is a good read for those with a passion for the subject.
The impetus for such a book (and the essays within) came from a 2015 campaign promise by the Liberal Party of Canada that, should they win, it would be the final election fought under Single-Member Plurality (‘first part the post’ in the vernacular). However, as soon as the party ascended to power, they completed a half-hearted effort before shelving it. While discussion surrounding electoral change is nothing new in Canada, actual serious consideration at a legislative level has been far from resonating.
The collection of essays within explore the current electoral system used in Canada, while also touching on many of the alternatives, most popularly Proportional Representation, Single Transferable Vote, and Alternate Vote. So as not to cause readers of the review to suffer severe eye glazing, I will not delve into the specifics, but I surmise that many who enjoy this type of reading will know the systems well.
Arguments surrounding the feasibility or desirability of changing from our current system are plentiful, with some academics exploring that there is more to the discussion than simple ‘fairness for all’. Constitutional discussions arise, as do those about how ‘fair’ and stable an alternative might be to creating a government that could serve effectively and keep Canada on track. While this area of Canadian politics has long been something I enjoyed, new and intriguing discussions arose, making me think again about some of my foundational thoughts about electoral reform.
The collection is a great cross-section of thoughts, ideas, and perspectives when it comes to elections in Canada and the need for reform. Nothing is entirely clear-cut, especially in a country as diverse and cleaved as Canada. While the country strives for strong, majority governments, there is something to be said for those who must rely on the support of other parties, ensuring a larger support base across the country.
At the time of posting this review during my first reading of the book, Canada awaited news of its 2021 General Election, with the likelihood of another minority Parliament (it happened). I sat, working at one of the polling stations, where single-member plurality was used. I continued to follow the discussion on electoral reform at all levels of government and keenly read about many of the options and possibilities that arise. Democracy at its best when people can cast a ballot, even if some feel certain ballots offer a muted result. If you have not fallen asleep reading this yet, you likely know to what I refer.
Kudos, contributors of all stripes, for opening my eyes to all the possibilities when it comes to electoral reform in Canada. I’m sure the discussion will be long, divisive, and varied.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
September 4, 2017
Should We Change How We Vote?: Evaluating Canada’s Electoral System is a series of essays by leading Canadian political commentators on Canada's current electoral system and current discourse on altering the system from a First Past the Post (FPP) voting system to a form of mixed representational voting. Topics range from democratic values, to accountability, political stability, the rights of minorities and women voters and Canadian voting systems, platforms and policy prescriptions. Canada has attempted to change its system a few times now, both at the Federal and Provincial level. Referendums on voting system changes have failed in British Colombia, Ontario and in the Maritime provinces, and an attempt was made to initiate a referendum in Quebec. Similarly, both the federal Conservatives and the current Liberal government in Canada have explored changing the system at a national level. All attempts have failed.
This book takes a critical look at the current Canadian system, and explores why changes seem to be widely demanded by voters, while simultaneously failing continuously at the polls. The book also touches on subjects such as Canadians values in terms of our democratic process, representation of minorities in current Canadian parties, and the benefits and drawbacks of the current electoral system. In the FPP system, Members of Parliament (MP's) are elected in geographic ridings that are created roughly based upon representation by population. MP's most often run as members of larger Federal political parties, the major parties being the Liberals, Progressive Conservatives and the New Democratic Party (NDP), as well as the small federal Green Party. The winning member of each riding gives the federal party a seat in the House of Commons, and the party with the most seats can claim victory as the ruling party in Canada. This system leads to perennial complaints about the fairness and proportionality of voting in Canada, as parties can form governments without actually gaining a majority of the popular vote. This is because a party wins by seat count, so even if an election is close by vote count between two parties, it may not be so based upon the number of seats won. This often leads to smaller parties, like the NDP and Green's, losing out on seat count even though they may receive a quarter or more of the popular vote.
However, a change to a representational system may not equate to the changes many voters feel they desire. When polled, most voters in Canada mention accountability and stability as major factors they seek in their democratic system. A representational system does not target these values, and instead increases the proportionality of the vote to seat ratio. This means that smaller parties will win seats representative of their percentage share of the overall national vote, not based upon the contests within each riding. However, it does nothing to enhance government accountability. Representational systems require frequent horse-trading to build coalition governments, and this haggling over policy often leads further away from what voters expected a platform to consist of. If a moderate conservative party like the Progressive Conservatives wins a hotly contested election with the Liberals, but requires support to form a government, it may be tempted to join with more extreme right parties to make up the difference - thus being forced to haggle with that party to form an acceptable platform, and leading that platform farther to the right than what most Canadians voted for. The same issues exist on the left, where governments will deal with more extreme left parties. Far from creating accountability, representational systems seem to create systems where party policies do not yet exist, and only come into being post election as coalitions are built.
Coalitions do often help small minorities in becoming more representative in government, but the same is true in a FPP system. Instead of haggling with numerous small interest group parties to form a government, FPP encourages "big tent" politics, where a political party is incentivized to represent as much of the Canadian voting sphere as they can. This brings policies decisively to the centre in terms of current voting trends and political demands from the voting population in order to encourage voters. This can lead to the same or similar results as an ideal representational coalition government.
Finally, as stability goes, Canada seems to have a glowing record of government stability in relation to many representational democracies. Canada's majoritarian system often leads to long periods of stable government, followed by stable power transitions as parties go through the electoral process and the ebbs and flows of voter whims. Canada's recent engagement with obscure voter blocs in Belgium as it attempted to sign a Free Trade Agreement with the European Union, which almost destroyed the entire deal for the entire Union, is an excellent example. Far from being an unworkable government, Canada's federal government has been skilled over the last few decades, under many different parties, at combating global issues and local concerns without generating political or social instability. The FPP system, at least for the time being, appears as a very stable voting system in regards to Canada's unique socio-cultural makeup, and in regards to its political situation as well.
So why the backlash against this system? The book is largely unclear. Their is widespread acknowledgement in Canada's political circles that voters are unhappy with the current voting system, but nobody - including voters themselves, seem able to communicate why. Canadians demands seem to be contradictory, and changing the voting system may satisfy on one hand, and destabilize on the other. For now it is certainly true that representational systems have been defeated multiple times at the polls at the provincial level, and changes seem to be unwarranted according to ruling parties, although for obvious reasons in most cases. Although this discourse still exists, it has also largely subsided after the Trudeau government announced their intentions to end looking at voting reform as a political platform, at least for this election, with large and immediate backlash, but little talk of it after. It seems many Canadian voters are at least thankful for the political stability currently - especially compared to issues in our two biggest allies, the UK and US. This issue may be off the table, but it has surfaced many times in Canada's history, and certainly will again.
All in all, this was a thoughtful look at Canada's current system of voting. Although largely in favour of the FPP system, this book takes a deep and critical look at both Canada's systems and its voting trends and democratic values to try and examine why this issue continues to come up, and why it has failed continuously to lead to policy change. The book certainly could have used a better analysis of representational systems globally, and a few essays on its benefits would have been potentially useful to boost the editors thesis through a deeper comparison. As it is, the book does a deep analysis of Canada's current system, and looks to generate some discourse on how the system is good, not just on how it is bad. The book consists of numerous essays, all well written and deep with political and technical analysis of voting structures, policy platforms and governance. An excellent read both for Canadian readers interested in politics, and global readers looking at good discourse on representational vs. majoritarian voting systems, with the discourse heavily tilted to the latter.
This book takes a critical look at the current Canadian system, and explores why changes seem to be widely demanded by voters, while simultaneously failing continuously at the polls. The book also touches on subjects such as Canadians values in terms of our democratic process, representation of minorities in current Canadian parties, and the benefits and drawbacks of the current electoral system. In the FPP system, Members of Parliament (MP's) are elected in geographic ridings that are created roughly based upon representation by population. MP's most often run as members of larger Federal political parties, the major parties being the Liberals, Progressive Conservatives and the New Democratic Party (NDP), as well as the small federal Green Party. The winning member of each riding gives the federal party a seat in the House of Commons, and the party with the most seats can claim victory as the ruling party in Canada. This system leads to perennial complaints about the fairness and proportionality of voting in Canada, as parties can form governments without actually gaining a majority of the popular vote. This is because a party wins by seat count, so even if an election is close by vote count between two parties, it may not be so based upon the number of seats won. This often leads to smaller parties, like the NDP and Green's, losing out on seat count even though they may receive a quarter or more of the popular vote.
However, a change to a representational system may not equate to the changes many voters feel they desire. When polled, most voters in Canada mention accountability and stability as major factors they seek in their democratic system. A representational system does not target these values, and instead increases the proportionality of the vote to seat ratio. This means that smaller parties will win seats representative of their percentage share of the overall national vote, not based upon the contests within each riding. However, it does nothing to enhance government accountability. Representational systems require frequent horse-trading to build coalition governments, and this haggling over policy often leads further away from what voters expected a platform to consist of. If a moderate conservative party like the Progressive Conservatives wins a hotly contested election with the Liberals, but requires support to form a government, it may be tempted to join with more extreme right parties to make up the difference - thus being forced to haggle with that party to form an acceptable platform, and leading that platform farther to the right than what most Canadians voted for. The same issues exist on the left, where governments will deal with more extreme left parties. Far from creating accountability, representational systems seem to create systems where party policies do not yet exist, and only come into being post election as coalitions are built.
Coalitions do often help small minorities in becoming more representative in government, but the same is true in a FPP system. Instead of haggling with numerous small interest group parties to form a government, FPP encourages "big tent" politics, where a political party is incentivized to represent as much of the Canadian voting sphere as they can. This brings policies decisively to the centre in terms of current voting trends and political demands from the voting population in order to encourage voters. This can lead to the same or similar results as an ideal representational coalition government.
Finally, as stability goes, Canada seems to have a glowing record of government stability in relation to many representational democracies. Canada's majoritarian system often leads to long periods of stable government, followed by stable power transitions as parties go through the electoral process and the ebbs and flows of voter whims. Canada's recent engagement with obscure voter blocs in Belgium as it attempted to sign a Free Trade Agreement with the European Union, which almost destroyed the entire deal for the entire Union, is an excellent example. Far from being an unworkable government, Canada's federal government has been skilled over the last few decades, under many different parties, at combating global issues and local concerns without generating political or social instability. The FPP system, at least for the time being, appears as a very stable voting system in regards to Canada's unique socio-cultural makeup, and in regards to its political situation as well.
So why the backlash against this system? The book is largely unclear. Their is widespread acknowledgement in Canada's political circles that voters are unhappy with the current voting system, but nobody - including voters themselves, seem able to communicate why. Canadians demands seem to be contradictory, and changing the voting system may satisfy on one hand, and destabilize on the other. For now it is certainly true that representational systems have been defeated multiple times at the polls at the provincial level, and changes seem to be unwarranted according to ruling parties, although for obvious reasons in most cases. Although this discourse still exists, it has also largely subsided after the Trudeau government announced their intentions to end looking at voting reform as a political platform, at least for this election, with large and immediate backlash, but little talk of it after. It seems many Canadian voters are at least thankful for the political stability currently - especially compared to issues in our two biggest allies, the UK and US. This issue may be off the table, but it has surfaced many times in Canada's history, and certainly will again.
All in all, this was a thoughtful look at Canada's current system of voting. Although largely in favour of the FPP system, this book takes a deep and critical look at both Canada's systems and its voting trends and democratic values to try and examine why this issue continues to come up, and why it has failed continuously to lead to policy change. The book certainly could have used a better analysis of representational systems globally, and a few essays on its benefits would have been potentially useful to boost the editors thesis through a deeper comparison. As it is, the book does a deep analysis of Canada's current system, and looks to generate some discourse on how the system is good, not just on how it is bad. The book consists of numerous essays, all well written and deep with political and technical analysis of voting structures, policy platforms and governance. An excellent read both for Canadian readers interested in politics, and global readers looking at good discourse on representational vs. majoritarian voting systems, with the discourse heavily tilted to the latter.
August 30, 2017
When I saw the book “Should We Change How We Vote”, my first thought was that it would be an unbiased, informative review of the issues involved in this challenging question. The lineup of eighteen contributors and three editors, most of whom are university professors, appeared to support my anticipation of a well-rounded discussion. Unfortunately, what I found was a one-sided presentation of why we should maintain the status quo. Of the first ten chapters, nine presented reform options and concluded that the current first past the post (FPTP) is the only reasonable choice.
Although the book provides ample explanations of why the Liberal Party’s promise of a system change by the next federal election was premature, it seems to go overboard in presenting every possible reason against any change. The introduction to the book suggests that even if electoral reform is off the table in the short run, these essays will provide background for future discussions. Unfortunately, the one-sided nature of the essays precludes it from fulfilling that goal. I was left to wonder: if there are no reasoned analyses that would support an alternative voting system, why did the book need to be written?
Chapter 7 finally gave details on how other systems have actually worked. The nomination processes in New Zealand mixed-member proportional system and Ireland’s single transferable vote system are presented. (More details can be obtained on each of these with a quick internet search). Issues of leadership selection and government formation are also presented.
Chapter 8 dealt with civility in politics. Unlike almost all of the other chapters, it was optimistic, and it seemed relevant regardless of the voting system involved.
The book concludes with a discussion of how the decision for electoral reform should be made. That is, should it be decided by the Parliament, by an independent commission, by a public referendum, or some other option. The arguments presented are interesting but, again, (with the exception of chapter 17), tend to be infused with a cynical “no-good-option” frame.
Although the book provides ample explanations of why the Liberal Party’s promise of a system change by the next federal election was premature, it seems to go overboard in presenting every possible reason against any change. The introduction to the book suggests that even if electoral reform is off the table in the short run, these essays will provide background for future discussions. Unfortunately, the one-sided nature of the essays precludes it from fulfilling that goal. I was left to wonder: if there are no reasoned analyses that would support an alternative voting system, why did the book need to be written?
Chapter 7 finally gave details on how other systems have actually worked. The nomination processes in New Zealand mixed-member proportional system and Ireland’s single transferable vote system are presented. (More details can be obtained on each of these with a quick internet search). Issues of leadership selection and government formation are also presented.
Chapter 8 dealt with civility in politics. Unlike almost all of the other chapters, it was optimistic, and it seemed relevant regardless of the voting system involved.
The book concludes with a discussion of how the decision for electoral reform should be made. That is, should it be decided by the Parliament, by an independent commission, by a public referendum, or some other option. The arguments presented are interesting but, again, (with the exception of chapter 17), tend to be infused with a cynical “no-good-option” frame.
May 5, 2019
Should we change how we vote is thought provoking, informative, and assumption challenging. Each chapter is its own paper written by some of Canada’s most preeminent legal, political, and constitutional scholars. Each author focuses on his or her area of expertise and uses it to address the question: should we change how we vote.
By addressing questions on if we need to change how we vote, ways to change how we vote, critical assessments of voting styles, and assumptions of voting systems each author addresses electoral reform from constitutional, political, practical and legal points of view. This book is full of answers and short of answers. There is no overarching conclusion, just a series of essays that address electoral reform from different points of view. Some authors decide to answer the question (or pose and answer their own question) while others challenge assumptions, or raise points that have yet to be considered.
Should we change how we vote is a technical book. Many of the topics require some prior understanding of Canada’s current electoral system and possible alternatives. Don’t let that stop you from reading this book. Rarely do you get so many subject matter experts all in one spot. I guarantee you will walk away from the book with more questions and New thoughts.
By addressing questions on if we need to change how we vote, ways to change how we vote, critical assessments of voting styles, and assumptions of voting systems each author addresses electoral reform from constitutional, political, practical and legal points of view. This book is full of answers and short of answers. There is no overarching conclusion, just a series of essays that address electoral reform from different points of view. Some authors decide to answer the question (or pose and answer their own question) while others challenge assumptions, or raise points that have yet to be considered.
Should we change how we vote is a technical book. Many of the topics require some prior understanding of Canada’s current electoral system and possible alternatives. Don’t let that stop you from reading this book. Rarely do you get so many subject matter experts all in one spot. I guarantee you will walk away from the book with more questions and New thoughts.
November 13, 2021
I got this book after the most recent election, when a lot of people were complaining about the Liberals not having changed the voting system. I've never had particularly strong feelings on the matter and figured I should inform myself.
This series of essays does a good job of laying out some of the challenges with changing the electoral system, some of the benefits of the current system and providing intellectual framework for how to think about representation.
An introductory chapter that has an overview of some of the different options that are canvassed probably would have helped me, but I understand I'm not the intended audience for this book. I also would have liked something to sort of pull together the essays other than section titles.
This series of essays does a good job of laying out some of the challenges with changing the electoral system, some of the benefits of the current system and providing intellectual framework for how to think about representation.
An introductory chapter that has an overview of some of the different options that are canvassed probably would have helped me, but I understand I'm not the intended audience for this book. I also would have liked something to sort of pull together the essays other than section titles.
June 8, 2025
After a few of the essays I couldn't get any further. Yes, since we have never had a different system in Canada, we can't absolutely guarantee the effects of one. However, when an effect is demonstrated in the vast majority of other countries that do have a PR system, it does indicate that this would likely occur here as well!!
December 2, 2019
really helped me write my paper on electoral reform
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews