As progress on some measures in the Liberal-NDP confidence-and-supply agreement continue to play out publicly, the two parties have quietly been in talks to table electoral reform legislation before the next federal vote.
Various failures in proportional representation systems elsewhere in the world indicated those systems are fundamentally flawed.
Proportional representation is the system Israel has. A guy like Benjamin Netanyahu can just cut some deals with far right whack jobs and form a coalition to be PM of Israel.
Are you saying you like how that worked out?
Also the EU has a proportional representation system and people in Britain didn’t feel the EU parliament represented them. Do we like how that worked out?
The biggest problem with FPTP is the name. Let’s rebrand it as Community Representation (because that’s what it is) and move on from spreadsheet warriors being triggered by some numbers in one column not matching the other column.
Bottom line is community representation systems represents minority interest better than proportional representation systems. Just because you can’t put power dynamics on a spreadsheet doesn’t mean they don’t exist. In fact power dynamics is the most important thing in politics and the power dynamics in a proportional representation system is completely terrible.
Right now we have a system where a party can have a majority of the seats with as little as 35% of the vote (and technically even less) and you’re saying it’s worse when the parties have to form alliancess so they represent a majority of the vote in order to hold the reigns?
It’s funny because at the moment we are moving towards elections that will put our own right wing/social conservative party in power with a majority while about 60% of the population votes center left to center right, with a proportional system the NDP and Liberals would just form an alliance and represent the majority of the population.