Re: Electoral reform — a twisted path, Nov. 14

Electoral reform — a twisted path, Nov. 14

If our prime minister is truly devoted to providing us with real representation in Parliament, why hasn’t he mounted a television campaign to explain and promote proportional representation, a system that awards parliamentary seats to each party based on its percentage share of the national vote?

Every vote enhances the power of the party chosen and makes a difference in the election. It would give more voice to smaller parties like the Greens. With PR, Elizabeth May might well have achieved official party status. Trudeau would still be prime minister but with only 139 seats — not a majority. It would be a minority government in which legislation would stand or fall on merit (not party agenda) and be reviewed by our entire political spectrum — and every voter would be represented.

Oh, I guess I just answered my own question.

Randy Gostlin, Oshawa

I was surprised to read that Hillary Clinton had more people voting for her than Donald Trump did. On reflection, I realized this should not surprise me, or Canadians, since America also has a first-past-the-post system. Neither country has yet discovered what almost all other countries have: proportional representation is a much better way of voting.

But we needn’t worry. Canada is lucky again — we are about to make the change to PR. All the signs are there that, this year, we will jump from having only about 50 per cent of our citizens with reps in Ottawa to about 80 per cent! Fair vote Canada tells us that most Canadians want it, all three parties are in favour and even about half of the Conservatives are, too!

William Shore, Sutton

Like many Canadians, I followed the U.S. presidential election quite closely and was very discouraged to see that Donald Trump was the victor. Because of the Electoral College system, Trump was elected despite receiving at least 1 per cent fewer overall votes than Hillary Clinton.

In Canada, we have a democratic deficit that is even greater. In a Canadian election, a party can receive a majority government despite winning less than 40 per cent of the popular vote.

The Liberals promised the 2015 election would be the last one to be held using the first-past-the-post system. Decisions will be coming soon on electoral reform and it is important Canadians hold the Liberals accountable to their promise.

Ryan McColeman, Toronto

The perverse result of the American presidential election is further evidence that Canada must move to proportional representation before it is too late. The American electoral college is a first-past-the-post system in almost all states and it has once again delivered the perverse result of the candidate who received fewer votes winning the election.

The feeling of alienation and futility among the electorate, the result of perceiving themselves as unrepresented, no doubt contributed to their decision to support a candidate who proposes simplistic and bigoted/fascistic solutions to complex problems. The world now has to live with that choice.

Canada’s parliamentary democracy was in peril during the period 2011-15, when a false-majority government supported by 24 per cent of the electorate (or 39 per cent of votes cast) routinely closed down debate, hid massive changes in omnibus bills and passed unconstitutional legislation.

If we do not adopt PR, our perverse FPTP system can and will hand 100 per cent of the power to another abusive administration that is not representative of the Canadian people.

David Fraser, Ottawa

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef seem to be backpedalling on their strong commitment to replace the first-past-the-post system. The extremely sparse media coverage of the strong support across Canada for some form of proportional representation is disappointing. Here are the facts:

The electoral reform committee heard strong evidence for PR from experts. A strong majority of those who attended the committee’s public consultations spoke in favour of PR.

Canadians have spoken loud and clear: We want a system where 30 per cent of the vote means about 30 per cent of the seats. Three parties representing 63 per cent of voters campaigned on a promise to ditch first-past-the-post and make every vote count. We expect the government to keep this promise.

Jill Schroder, Vancouver

Why is the Toronto Star not reflecting the strong response the all-party committee for electoral reform received in favour of a proportional representation system? Certainly it is well worth debating and exposing.

Bruna Nota, Toronto

The all-party committee on electoral reform has just finished a four-month long countrywide consultation with experts and the public on electoral reform. They discovered a clear appetite for proportional representation.

This reinforces the findings of 13 previous electoral reform processes in Canada (the first being in 1920!) and two thorough and impartial citizens assemblies.

FPTP severely skews the results of elections and produces false majority governments by parties that receive only a minority of votes.

Despite this, the issue has received very little coverage from the major media outlets and even many Liberal MPs have not held the consultations and town halls they were supposed to conduct. Judy Sgro, the member of Parliament for my riding, mailed out a survey on electoral reform to her constituents that only meets the barest definition of consultation.

It is quite sad when politicians and the media hold views that are so different from their constituents. Electoral reform is an important issue that can re-engage citizens in their democracy and produce a more fair and representative government.

Ezra de Leon, Toronto