The Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) made a promise in 2018 to change our voting method (first past the post) for a mixed proportional voting system with regional compensation, where 80 deputies would have been elected per constituency and 45 others by compensation. . If the reform had taken place, the CAQ would have obtained 15 fewer deputies than in 2022, while remaining in the majority.
The big winner from the reform would have been the Conservative Party of Quebec, which would have obtained 10 seats in the National Assembly. Unfortunately, the promise of reform will not have seen the light of day, even if more than half of Quebecers want reform (53%). The pandemic gave the government a way out of abandoning the project.
The cost of the status quo
When you sit in opposition and are victims of distortions in the voting system, you easily claim to want to reform it. However, when we think that it can allow us to win (or that it has allowed us to do so) the criticism disappears. Our political parties represented in the National Assembly all believe they can win with the status quo.
The concentration of the Liberal vote in Montreal allows the Quebec Liberal Party to secure a certain number of seats, despite the weakness of the French-speaking vote. Québec solidaire could adopt the same reasoning regarding its stagnation and its inability to leave the cities. For its part, the CAQ believes that this could benefit it again. Recent polls show a link between the PQ and CAQ votes. Thus, the Parti Québécois could take advantage of the voting method to obtain a potential majority with around 30% of the votes.
The question is therefore clear: why change a voting method that benefits us? The response observed further damages the bond of trust between our politicians and citizens. We will not be more surprised to note that 52% of CAQ voters said they were unfavorable to electoral reform.
Why change?
Our system promotes vote distortion, because it rewards parties that win a plurality of votes in each constituency. Small parties are then strongly disadvantaged in their representation in terms of seats. Additionally, voters feel little incentive to vote for smaller parties, knowing that they are unlikely to win seats.
Finally, the current voting method encourages strategic voting and therefore does not encourage voters to vote according to their real convictions. To promote democratic representation, it is essential to relaunch the debate and defend the establishment of a mixed ballot, as proposed in 2019 by the government.
Better representation is possible
While the majority wants more proportional representation, some people fear a proportional system due to the lack of regional representativeness and the instability that can result, as is the case in Italy and Israel. In contrast, compensatory mixed proportional representation is a system used in Germany and New Zealand where the first votes are used to elect local representatives (one per constituency under majority rules, as we know them currently) and the second votes are used to compensate for the unequal distribution of majority votes.
In the 2023 New Zealand elections, the Conservative Party won the election with 38% of the vote and received approximately 39% of the seats (43 constituency seats and 5 list seats). The electoral threshold being 5%, the New Zealand First Party received 6% of the popular vote and 8 seats, although it did not manage to elect candidates in constituencies. This voting method also allows Maoris to have their own deputies.
In Germany, the compensatory mixed electoral system allowed the formation of stable coalitions, between the CDU, the SPD, the FDP and the Grünen (Greens) while sidelining the far-right AFD party in the parliamentary assembly.
The New Zealand and German cases demonstrate that regional representation and proportional representation can work mutually. With a similar parliamentary system, Quebec can and must have a better system. We must stop fearing every change. Wouldn’t that be a great risk?