What if every vote had an equal impact on who was elected to Parliament?
Our democratic system works, to a point. Elections happen, governments form, laws get passed. But what if it worked better — for everyone? What would it look like if our legislature truly reflected the full range of views that voters actually hold?
That shouldn't be a controversial question — healthy democracies strive to improve themselves And most of the world’s democracies have already answered it — by adopting voting systems that ensure the mix of people elected actually matches the mix of views voters hold. Canada hasn’t yet. Below, we explore in concrete terms what better voting might mean, why it matters, and why the evidence for moving in that direction is overwhelming.
What better voting means for our society
How would elections be different?
Single-Member Districts ...: Under our current system, each riding elects a single winner. If you voted for someone else — no matter how many other voters share your political views — you get no representation at all. Your vote is simply recorded as a losing tally and nothing more.
... vs Multi-Member Districts: A proportional approach works differently. Instead of electing one representative per riding, each local region elects several. The mix of people elected reflects the mix of views voters in that region actually hold. If roughly a third of voters in your region lean one way, roughly a third of your region’s representatives should too. That’s not complicated — it's just an accurate reflection of how everyone voted.
Representation for All: The result: almost every voter helps elect someone. Your vote contributes to real representation, not just a losing tally. The legislature starts actually looking like the people who elected it.
What would this mean for me - and for all of us?
Consider those currently left out: You may already have a representative who reflects your views. But consider your neighbours — your colleagues, your community — people with different perspectives who currently get little or no voice in the legislature. A democracy that includes more of those voices doesn’t just benefit the people who’ve felt left out. It benefits us all.
Better includes women and minorities: More inclusive voting systems also do a much better job of representing women and minorities. Countries with proportional representation average roughly 31% women in their parliaments, compared to about 17% in winner-take-all systems — a gap of roughly 14 percentage points. New Zealand, which adopted mixed-member proportional representation in 1996, now elects 50% women. Canada, by contrast, sits at just 31% — ranking 71st globally — despite electing its most diverse parliament to date in 2025. This happens because multi-member districts make it easier for parties to run diverse slates and for voters to elect them, removing structural barriers that single-member districts reinforce.
More inclusive policies are better for all: When governments need to earn broader support to pass legislation, they’re less likely to make sharp reversals every election cycle. The political scientist Arend Lijphart, in his landmark study Patterns of Democracy (2012), found that consensus democracies built on proportional representation produce more stable, durable policies than majoritarian systems — without sacrificing effectiveness. When more people feel their vote actually matters, more people participate. Proportional democracies consistently show higher voter turnout (~7-8 percentage points higher), more competitive elections, and governments that must remain responsive to a wider range of citizens — not just their core supporters. And you get to vote for what you actually believe in, not tactically against what you fear most.
Could a different way of voting reduce polarization in our society?
Absolutely — and the evidence is clear on this point. Most Canadians, whatever their politics, don’t want our current culture of conflict and political polarization. A 2025 Digital Public Square survey found that 55% of Canadians believe political polarization is getting worse, and two-thirds place themselves near the centre of the political spectrum. The problem isn’t that Canadians are deeply divided — it’s that our voting system rewards parties for acting as if we are, because mobilizing your base against the “other side” is often more effective than finding common ground.
Changed Incentives: Proportional systems change that incentive. When governments must build broader coalitions to govern, collaboration stops being a weakness and starts being a necessity. Somer and McCoy (2018) showed that countries with proportional voting have lower levels of political polarization — less of the "affective tribalism" where we don’t just disagree with the other side, but distrust and dislike them. A more inclusive voting system creates the conditions for a healthier political culture — a bonus on top of the fairer count on election night.
Sounds good, but is this just theory or wishful thinking?
Absolutely not — more inclusive voting systems have a strong track record. More than two-thirds of the world’s democracies already use some form of proportional representation — Germany, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Ireland, and dozens more. These aren’t experiments. They’re mature, stable democracies whose citizens overwhelmingly value the system they have.
Best places to live: They also happen to be among the best places to live on earth. The countries that consistently top the UN Human Development Index — which measures health, education, and standard of living — are overwhelmingly countries with proportional voting systems. The same countries dominate the V-Dem Liberal Democracy Index, the world’s most rigorous measure of democratic health, with Denmark, Norway, and Sweden holding the top three positions. And every single country in the top 10 of the World Happiness Report uses an inclusive voting system — Finland has held the number one spot for nine years running, with Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway close behind.
Overtaking Canada: Canada used to sit near the top of these rankings. We held first place on the UN Human Development Index through much of the 1990s; we ranked as high as 5th on the World Happiness Report in its early years. Today we sit 16th on the HDI and 25th on the Happiness Report — not because Canada has gone backwards in absolute terms, but because the countries with more inclusive voting systems have been advancing more quickly. That trajectory deserves attention.
Not a magic bullet, but a strong contributor: We’re not claiming proportional voting alone explains everything that makes these societies thrive. But it is hard to ignore that the countries which ensure every voice is heard in their legislatures are also the ones that seem best at solving problems together — and that none of them have chosen to go back. Almost no country that has moved toward more inclusive, representative voting has ever returned to a winner-take-all system. The evidence, and the momentum, point clearly in one direction.
Deeper Dive: If you want to dive deeper into any of this, check out Fair Vote Canada's Look at the Evidence.