When Avi Lewis won the NDP leadership contest on March 29, many Albertans saw little to agree with, particularly when it comes to the energy sector. His positions are perceived to be so anti-Alberta that even the head of the Alberta NDP, Naheed Nenshi, felt the need to publicly renounce them.
Most Albertans may not be inclined to pay much attention to the federal NDP. But there is one part of Lewis’ platform that deserves a strong second look, especially for Albertans who feel unrepresented in Ottawa — electoral reform.
Canada’s current system is straightforward. Voters elect a local candidate in each riding; the candidate with the most votes becomes an MP. The party with the most MPs almost always forms the government.
But this system produces distortions. A party can secure a strong majority of seats while falling well short of a majority of the popular vote. In both the 2019 and 2021 elections, the Conservatives won the popular vote yet were shut out of government.
The imbalance is especially stark in Alberta. More than two million Albertans cast ballots in the most recent election, yet only two MPs from the governing party — representing roughly 180,000 voters — sit on the government benches. It is no surprise that many Albertans feel politically sidelined.
Lewis’ proposal — mixed-member proportional representation (MMPR) — would correct this distortion of democracy. This is a system that aligns seats in the House of Commons with the national popular vote, while preserving local representation. Voters still elect their local MP and have access to their offices for petitions and complaints.
Under such a system, recent election results would have produced a very different Parliament. The Conservatives would likely have emerged as the largest party, with a credible path to forming government through negotiation. Alberta MPs, instead of being confined largely to Opposition, could have exercised real influence within government.
MMPR would also improve the incentives that shape federal politics. Parties would need to compete for votes across the country, not just in a handful of battleground regions such as the Greater Toronto Area. Votes cast in Alberta for any party would carry real weight, rather than being written off as “wasted.” The Liberal party would pay more attention to Albertans’ concerns.
It would also broaden political choice. Smaller parties would gain representation, enriching national debate. And the outsized influence of regionally concentrated parties such as the Bloc Québécois would likely diminish in a more fragmented, proportional Parliament.
Critics raise two common objections. The first is that reform will never happen because parties benefiting from the current system will block it.
That view is too cynical. Political systems do change. New Zealand moved from a Canadian-style majoritarian model to MMPR in 1996 after sustained public pressure and a referendum.
The second critique is that proportional systems produce weak, unstable governments. The evidence suggests otherwise. Countries such as Norway and the Netherlands operate effectively under proportional systems, with good governance and high living standards.
New Zealand remains the best example, since our political systems are so similar. Last I checked, the Kiwis are doing just fine.
There is much in Lewis’s platform that will not resonate in Alberta. But the NDP has long served as an incubator for ideas that Canadians have come to cherish, such as our system of universal health care.
Electoral reform may be another.
A more proportional system would not guarantee any particular party victory. But it would ensure that Alberta’s votes translate into real influence in Ottawa. It would reduce regional alienation and raise the overall quality of our democracy.
That is an idea worth serious consideration, regardless of who is proposing it.
Marshall Palmer is a Calgarian with a PhD in political science and presently a research fellow at Carleton University.