Direct Party and Representative Voting
Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR Voting)[1][2] or Proportional Parliamentary Voting (PPV) [3] [4] is a proposed form of representative democracy, and a form of Proportional Representation, where the share of votes that a party can use on motions in parliament is directly proportional to the share of “party votes” they received as a mandate from citizens in a general election (regardless of how many seats that party has acquired as district representatives).
This direct proportionality is achieved in the following way: In a general election, citizen voters cast two votes: The first vote is traditional: It is for citizens to select their district representative (e.g. Member of Parliament or “MP”). (Each vote is a single choice - the voter marks their choice with a single X. One “district representative” is elected in each single district.) The second vote is new under DPR voting: It is for citizens to select the political party of their choice. It's called a “party vote”.
The share of the “party votes” that each party wins in an election is then used to determine how many “Parliamentary votes” each party can use on motions in Parliament. This amount of “Parliamentary votes” allotted to a party is then mathematically distributed exactly equally amongst that party's MPs - the winners of district elections. This “mathematical distributing” determines the exact weight that each individual MP’s vote will get when voting on motions in Parliament. (This “shared weight” calculation could, for example, result in the weight of an individual MP’s vote being a fraction such as 0.9, or 1.1, etc -- depending on the total share of the party votes that each party wins in an election.)
History
Direct Party and Representative Voting was first proposed by Stephen Johnson of the United Kingdom. He posted information about this system online in February 2010 in an independent website intended to inform visitors about an alternative to the ‘First Past the Post' system for Westminster Parliamentary elections.[5]
Attention gained
In April, 2011, the non-partisan, independent blog "On Procedure and Politics" wrote a descriptive post about Direct Party and Representative Voting. (This blog focuses primarily on aspects of parliamentary procedure, parliamentary government in general and politics in a very general sense.)[6]
Attention gained in Canada
This type of Proportional Representation representative democracy (with its general election voting system) gained attention in Canada: It was discussed in 2013 as one option in a public consultative lecture and on a printed survey (see link) which was filled out during public meetings across Canada held by New Democratic Party (Canada) Member of Parliament Craig Scott, Official Opposition Critic for Democratic and Parliamentary Reform. Beginning in 2013, Scott carried out these public consultation meetings as part of the “NDP Cross-Canada consultation on bringing proportional representation to Canada’s electoral system.”[7] The public consultation, in which DPR voting was discussed with the public, was co-hosted by the NDP and the Toronto chapter of a non-partisan organization called Fair Vote Canada.[8][9] [10] (That same day, as part of the same multi-city launch of their campaign for proportional representation, Fair Vote Canada also held a press conference in Ottawa that included prominent people from several parties.)[11][12]
This public consultation began after Scott’s resolution on Electoral Reform was passed in the federal NDP Policy convention in April 2013.[13] This resolution stated that, “[Scott] should consult widely in communities across Canada before the next federal election.”
Comparison to Mixed Member Proportional system
The passed resolution at the NDP policy convention also stated that, “the federal New Democratic Party reaffirm its desire to reform Canada’s electoral system by way of a system that combines proportional representation and direct election of Members of Parliament from constituencies, that is to say, through a version of mixed member proportional (MMP) representation that is adapted to Canada..” Even though Direct Party and Representative Voting is not exactly the traditional form of mixed member proportional (MMP) representation, nevertheless it does fulfill the resolution’s requirement of “a system that combines proportional representation and direct election of Members of Parliament from constituencies.”[14]
Comparison to Direct Representation
In DPR voting, each party's votes in the parliament are directly proportional to the "party votes" they win in the General Election. In the particular aspect of "achieving direct proportionality with a weighting calculation," this system is similar to “direct representation.” However DPR voting is not the same as direct representation in all aspects. Here is the crucial difference: "Direct representation" is weighted in proportion to the number of citizens who have chosen that "candidate" to represent them. DPR voting, on the other hand, is weighted in proportion to the number of citizens who have chosen that "party" (not "individual") to represent them.
See also
References
- ↑ "Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR Voting)" - name given by its inventor, Stephen Johnson of the UK
- ↑ "Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR Voting)". Stephen Johnson. February, 2010. Retrieved March 21, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ "Proportional Parliamentary Voting (PPV)" is the name given by Craig Scott. Both names, "DPR Voting" and "PPV" were discussed and explained in a public consultative lecture by Canadian New Democratic Party (Canada) Member of Parliament Craig Scott , who is Canada's Official Opposition Critic for Democratic and Parliamentary Reform, and is on the faculty at Osgoode Hall Law School. The speech was Sept 19, 2013 at a public forum called "Democracy Day on the Danforth" held at the Eastminster United Church, 310 Danforth Avenue, Toronto, Canada. During the forum, Scott handed out a printed survey to attendees, which included one question about "Proportional Parliamentary Voting (PPV)." The forum was part of the “NDP Cross-Canada consultation on bringing proportional representation to Canada’s electoral system” which began in 2013. This consultation was begun as a result of the NDP passing a resolution at their National Party Policy Convention meeting April 12-14, 2013. The public consultation, in which DPR voting was discussed with the public, was co-hosted by the NDP and the Toronto chapter of a non-partisan organization called Fair Vote Canada.
- ↑ Scott, Craig (February, 2014). "Comment by Craig Scott, NDP Democratic Reform Critic" (This is an interactive website for exchanging ideas. It's an Online citizen-engagement platform, in which NDP Democratic Reform Critic Craig Scott seeks to engage the residents of Toronto-Danforth and people across Canada in issues of national and local importance.). Site: New Democracy; Topic: "HOUSE LEGISLATION: UnFair Elections Act, Bill C-23"; In response to that "Bill C-23" Topic, the following “Idea” entry was begun on Feb 11, 2014 by Wilf Day. It had this title: “With a false majority from 39.6% of voters, fair elections?”. New Democratic Party of Canada and Craig Scott. Retrieved March 29, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) This link contains the following quoted interactive thread of conversation (Notice that Craig Scott is the first in the conversation to use his label of "Proportional Parliamentary Voting"). Opening comment from Wilf D: "They have the gall to call this the Fair Elections Act? A real Fair Elections Act would let every vote elect an MP from your first choice of party, accountable to your local riding or local region." Comment from Boyd R.: "Here's a shortcut to Proportional Representation that is easy to explain, easy to implement, and will therefore get us there faster: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7_MGmQKOo8 and this: http://www.dprvoting.org/ " Comment from Wilf D: "Boyd R.'s idea might be workable for the United Kingdom (although no country in the world gives MPs weighted votes, and House of Commons committees would be tricky). But in Canada, each province has a fixed number of MPs, and you can't constitutionally have votes from Alberta giving voting weight to MPs from Ontario. So the weighting calculation would have to be province by province. The Green Party would have ten MPs, one from each province, each with a different weight. There would be an Alberta Liberal MP with a lot of weight, and a PEI NDP MP with little weight. Now House of Commons Committees would be very tricky indeed. By contrast, the MMP model recommended by the Law Commission of Canada has no constitutional problems. Ten different Commissions, Assemblies or Reports have looked at PR in Canada, and none has recommended this system. We don't need yet another model. We need a political decision to move toward proportional representation." Comment from Craig Scott, NDP Democratic Reform Critic: "Wilf is correct that proportional parliamentary voting can only be done, as a statutory system, by breaking it up into province by province weighting within the House, due to constitutional requirement that provinces should have as many MPs as their population's percentage demands (with the exception of provinces like PEI benefiting from the other constitutional privilege that a province cannot have fewer MPs than they had Senators at the time the 1982 Constitutiona Act came into force). That is not to say that a governing party could not use the idea of weighted parliamentary voting as a reference point for achieving broad enough support in Parliament for legislation to be deemed reflective of majority sentiment." (This is the end of Scott's comment) - ↑ "Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR Voting)". Stephen Johnson. February, 2010. Retrieved March 21, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ pseudonym: Radical Centrist (April 20, 2011). "Blog post: Direct Party and Representative Voting" (Blog). Independent Blog: On Procedure and Politics (This site is in the Top 100 sites of the Canadian blogosphere among other awards shown on its left sidebar.). Retrieved March 26, 2011.
- ↑ "NDP HITS ROAD ON ELECTORAL REFORM". New Democratic Party of Canada, and subpage by NDP MP Craig Scott. September, 2013. Retrieved March 18, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ "Event advertisement: March with Craig Scott, MP and Fair Vote tomorrow and hear Tom Mulcair". Fair Vote Toronto; (Fair Vote Canada is a multipartisan organization). Fair Vote Toronto, the Toronto chapter of Fair Vote Canada. September 18, 2013. Retrieved March 29, 2014.
|Authors list=missing|1=(help) - ↑ "Democracy Day on the Danforth". September 19th, 2013. Retrieved March 30, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ "Householder - October 2013 (Newsletter for Craig Scott, NDP Member of Parliament, for the riding of Toronto Danforth); specifically the article titled, "Let's work together to make every vote count"". ISSUU and Craig Scott, NDP Member of Parliament, Toronto Danforth. October, 2103. Retrieved March 24, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ MacKinnon, Leslie (September 21, 2013). "Some Liberals join NDP in push for 'fairer' voting system". CBC News. Retrieved March 23, 2014.
- ↑ "Fair Vote Canada Launches the Make Every Vote Count Campaign". Fair Vote Canada. September 19, 2013. Retrieved March 25, 2014.
- ↑ "NDP Convention 2013: Resolution on Electoral Reform". The Canadian Progressive. NDP Policy convention was April 12-14, 2013. Retrieved March 18, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ "NDP Convention 2013: Resolution on Electoral Reform". The Canadian Progressive. NDP Policy convention was April 12-14, 2013. Retrieved March 18, 2014. Check date values in:
|date=(help)
External Links
Video explanations
This article "Direct Party and Representative Voting" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
