No — and that’s revealing. Canada has used other voting systems multiple times, and academic experts say the pattern is consistent: political leaders adopt or abandon electoral rules based on what serves their interests, not what’s fairest.

In the 1920s, farmers’ governments in Alberta and Manitoba introduced the Alternative Vote (AV) in rural ridings and the Single Transferable Vote (STV) in cities. But these weren’t democratic reforms that sought to give voters more voice — rather, they were political calculations. AV helped consolidate the governing parties’ rural base, while STV in Winnipeg and Calgary helped manage urban class conflict during periods of labour unrest. As political scientists Dennis Pilon and Harold Jansen have documented, these changes were tactical: leaders adopted systems that helped them and dropped them when they didn’t.

In BC in the early 1950s, the Liberal-Conservative coalition government adopted the Alternative Vote specifically to prevent the CCF (the forerunner of the NDP) from winning under first-past-the-post. AV was used for two provincial elections — then quietly dropped once it had served its purpose.

The lesson is clear: electoral system changes in Canada have historically been driven by who benefits, not by what’s fair. The current resistance to change is nothing new — it’s the same logic in modern clothes.

Yes, but principally when they're in opposition and experiencing the unfairness of FPTP. Consider the following:

Scott Reid, Conservative Critic for Democratic Reform: “We need to build a coalition of parliamentarians, intellectuals and journalists behind the idea that first past the post is not acceptable in a mature democracy and that some kind of electoral reform is needed.”

Jean Chretien, Former Prime Minister (Liberal Party):  “[T]he federal election system has to be reformed to help end Western alienation, which … has been fuelled by a chronic lack of Western representation in the federal government.”

Stephen Harper, Former Prime Minister (Conservative Party): “Our parliamentary government creates a concentrated power structure out of step with other aspects of society. For Canadian democracy to mature, Canadian citizens must face these facts, as citizens in other countries have, and update our political structures to reflect the diverse political aspirations of our diverse communities.” “Many of Canada’s problems stem from a winner-take-all style of politics that allows governments in Ottawa to impose measures abhorred by large areas of the country.”

Justin Trudeau, former Prime Minister (Liberal Party): “We need to know that when we cast a ballot, it counts. That when we vote, it matters. So I’m proposing that we make every vote count.”

As to why they haven't changed the system:

Stephen Harper (former Prime Minister, Conservative Party): “it is seldom in the short-term interest of the party in power to carry out electoral reform; by definition, the system worked admirably for those now in power and changing the system might benefit the opponents next time.”

Christy Clark (former Premier of BC, Liberal Party): “The hacks, the backroom boys, and the politicians who are served and elected by our current system … have grown accustomed to the power the current system grants to them. I see people whose interests and in many cases, whose income is dependent on keeping our system the way it is. People who, unlike you, relish the ugly realities that are the consequence of our first past the post system. … If the established interests succeed in defeating this [voting reform], they won’t give you another chance.”

Scott Reid (former MP, Conservative Party): “All 301 members of parliament are here because the first past the post system put us here. It may be that we will be able, through the efforts of high-minded members … to temporarily build a majority within the House that is brave enough or self-sacrificing enough to abandon the status quo for a future that would return only some of us to this place, but it will be an uphill battle.”

Hugh Segal (former Conservative Senator):  “As those who are elected under the first past the post regime have won within that regime’s strictures, they are unlikely to want it to change. This strident complacency leads to an unwelcome tolerance for unrepresentative democracy.”

Yes, but! There have been seven referendums in Canada on changing the voting system at the provincial/territorial level. Three have produced majority votes in favour, but in all cases the government declined to follow through.

British Columbia (2005 & 2009)
In 2004, a Citizens’ Assembly — 160 randomly selected British Columbians who deliberated for nearly a year — recommended adopting STV by an overwhelming majority. The government accepted the recommendation would go to referendum, but set the threshold at 60% support in 60% of ridings — a bar with no precedent in Canadian constitutional practice. In 2005, the STV proposal won 57.7% of the popular vote — a clear majority, but just short of the extraordinary threshold. A second referendum in 2009, held with minimal government support or public education funding, saw support fall to 39%.

British Columbia (2018)
The NDP government held a mail-in referendum on proportional representation as part of its confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens. The “No” side was heavily funded by business interests; questions about the process were raised; turnout was just 42%. The status quo won 61% — but critics noted the vote was held without a Citizens’ Assembly process and with limited public education.

Prince Edward Island (2016 & 2019)
In 2016, a plebiscite resulted in 55% support for Mixed Member Proportional — a clear majority. The government rejected implementation, citing low absolute turnout, and promised a second referendum. In 2019, with a binding threshold requiring a majority in 17 of 27 districts, the “Yes” side won 15 districts and 48% of the popular vote — the government declared the status quo had won. Taken together: a majority of PEI voters voted for change, and it was still rejected.

Ontario (2007)
A Citizens’ Assembly recommended MMP; 86 of 102 members voted for the change. The referendum result was just 37% in favour — widely attributed to almost no government funding for public education about the proposal, and a 60% threshold requirement.

Yukon (2025)
A Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform — randomly selected Yukon residents who deliberated through 2024 — recommended switching from first-past-the-post to a ranked-choice voting system. A plebiscite was held alongside the territorial election in November 2025, and 56% of voters supported the change. The Yukon Party, which won the election, had favoured the existing system during the campaign — and after the votes were counted, simply declined to implement the result. Once again, a leader with the power to act chose not to.

Justin Trudeau campaigned in 2015 on the explicit promise that “2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.” A multiparty House committee consulted broadly; its 2016 report recommended proportional representation. In February 2017, the government abandoned reform, citing “lack of consensus” — despite the committee having reached one.

Trudeau later admitted he had personally preferred the Alternative Vote — a system that, unlike proportional representation, would likely have benefited his own party specifically.

The conflict of interest was barely concealed: a party leader who won a majority under the existing system was handed a recommendation from an all-party committee that could potentially lead to replacing our current voting system with one that would reduce his own party’s advantage. Trudeau disliked the idea, and, as he later acknowledged, simply chose to ignore the committee's recommendation: "It was my decision to make and I chose to make it" (2017).