Electoral districts

One of the arguments I heard against BC-STV was that the proposed electoral districts would take away voting power from smaller communities. With a small example, I think we can illustrate how that additional power is sometimes horribly unfair. Take the following ridings and their associated population sizes as an example:

Because of how riding borders are drawn and population sizes change, Surrey-Tynehead has a greater population than North Coast and Peace River South combined, but half the number of representatives. Each person in the smaller ridings effectively has twice the voting power of those in the larger riding.

To take the example to an extreme, suppose each city in BC had its own riding with a single representative each. Would that be fair considering Vancouver has a disproportionate population in comparison to the rest of the cities?

One of solutions to this problem is to amalgamate smaller ridings with single representatives into larger ones with multiple representatives. The number of representatives could then change yearly as the population grows or shrinks (possible with BC-STV, but not under our current system). That seems fair to me, but I suppose 61% of British Columbians disagree.

BC-STV rejected by BC

I find it difficult to believe that BC-STV didn’t pass, especially considering preliminary polling showed a 65% support for it. Still, it’s not happening and it likely won’t for a long time. So these results? The skewing of seats won to popular vote? Yeah, get used to it.

PartyPopular voteSeats won
Liberal46.0%57.6%
NDP42.0%42.3%
Green8.1%0.0%
Conservative2.1%0.0%

I get that proportional voting isn’t to the majority’s liking; The leading party will always stand to lose the most in any form of proportional representation. With a requirement for 60% support, it’s unlikely we’ll ever move away from FPTP. Frustration.

Argue in good faith

The following is a quote from nostv.org, a site arguing against BC-STV.

Proponents say because STV it is more proportional “overall” if is a fairer system. But a candidate in a two-member riding in northern BC can get elected with 33.3% public support while a Capital Region candidate can get elected with just 12.5% of the votes cast. This means some MLAs have had to win far more support than others to be elected to the BC Legislature.

At first, this sounds horribly unfair, but consider the following scenario. Let’s say we have Riding A with 1000 people and 1 elected representative and Riding B with 2000 people and 2 elected representatives. Riding A representatives require 50% of the vote, whereas representatives in Riding B require 25%. The percentages are different, but both still require 500 votes to win.

To say that these percentages are unfair is disingenuous to the argument. Preying on poor mathematical intuition? Come on now. Try raising a more legitimate argument: STV results in representation that more closely reflects the popular vote, but results in minority governance.

Disadvantages of the plurality voting system

I won’t go into my specific concerns with Canada’s voting system as they’re well documented on Wikipedia, but I would like to illustrate my frustration with our 2008 election as an example.

PartyPopular voteSeats won
Conservative37.6%46.4%
Liberal26.2%24.6%
New Democrat18.2%12.0%
Bloc Québécois10.0%16.2%
Green7.0%0%

Maybe we can look at some alternatives?