What is proposed for Ontario

Ontario Citizens' Assembly wasn't given much time to design a new electoral system. With only 6 weekends available, the Assembly was unable to develop an advanced system that would combine regionally based open lists with a province-wide proportionality. So the simplest option was chosen: A Mixed-Member Proportional system, similar to the one used in New Zealand. Voters will be casting two ballots, one for a local candidate and one for the political party of their choice, electing 90 MPPs from single-member constituencies as well as 39 MPPs - "at large" from closed party lists. If a party wins lesser share of riding seats than its share of the popular vote - list seats will be added to make up the difference.

Obviously, most of the Assembly members considered the lack of proportionality to be the biggest disadvantage of the existing electoral system, so the new voting system proposal was designed to put proportionality first. Even smaller parties (provided they receive more than 3% of the vote) will be represented in the Legislature according to their share of the popular vote. The proposal allows additional "overhang" seats to be added if one of the parties sweeps so many local seats that 39 list seats are not enough to offset the distortion. So the issue of proportionality is well taken care of.

These measures are also designed to address the strategic voting issue. The two-ballot voting allows people to vote for the party of their choice while supporting the "winnable" candidate on the local ballot. By guaranteeing full proportionality (even if it requires adding extra seats to the Legislature), the proposed voting system would encourage Ontarians to vote their conscience on the local ballot as well. However that doesn't eliminate strategic voting completely. Votes for the parties that fail to meet the 3% threshold would still be wasted, not transferred to voters' second choice parties. And, since the party list proportionality doesn't accommodate the Independents, for them it will be either a local seat or nothing.

Ensuring that proportionality doesn't compromise accountability and maintains fair representation for the regions is yet another uneasy task. The Assembly is currently working on a set of guidelines to ensure that parties use democratic process for list nominations. Most likely, the parties will be required to provide full report on their nomination process, as well as demographic and geographic characteristics of their list candidates.

In my opinion, this could be addressed by making at least 30 of the 39 list seats regionally affiliated; that would also allow open lists, thus making "list" MPPs accountable to the voters. Another option is to use flexible lists, made up of local candidates that won fairly large share of the local vote but failed to win seats. Again, that would make "list" MPPs accountable to the voters, let alone that it will encourage even the small parties to run as many local candidates as possible.

But even as it is, I'd consider the new voting system proposal a step in the right direction. If I still lived in Ontario - I'd vote for it. Yes, the proposal is by no means perfect. But it sure beats the current system where voting your conscience often means splitting the vote.