Should We Change How We Vote? ─ Evaluating Canada's Electoral System

During the 2015 federal election, the Liberal Party pledged that, if elected, they would end the ?first past the post” electoral system, where whichever candidate receives the most votes wins a riding even if they have not received a majority of all votes cast. After the Liberals assumed power, Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef followed up on their campaign promise by announcing a parliamentary committee to evaluate alternative electoral systems and to report their findings before the end of 2016. Challenging the idea that first past the post is obsolete, Should We Change How We Vote? urges Canadians to make sure they understand their electoral system before making drastic changes to it. The contributors to this volume assert that there is perhaps no institution more misunderstood and misrepresented than the Canadian electoral system ? praised by some for ensuring broad regional representation in Ottawa, but criticized by others for allowing political parties with less than half the popular vote to assume more than half the seats in Parliament. They consider not only how the system works, but also its flaws and its advantages, and whether or not electoral reform is legitimate without a referendum. An essential guide to a crucial debate about the country’s future, Should We Change How We Vote? asks if there are alternative reforms that would be easier to implement than a complete overhaul of the electoral system.

Andrew Potter is the director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada. Daniel Weinstock is James McGill Professor in the Faculty of Law at McGill University and director of the McGill Institute for Health and Social Policy. Peter Loewen is director of the School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Toronto.