What kind of electoral reform do you want? Montreal event lays out the options

Prime MinisterJustin Trudeau'spromise to find a new way for voters to elect federal politicians has brought urgency to long-running concerns of political scientists.

They have noted that Canada, along with many of other countries in Europe and North America, hasbeen experiencing lowvoter turnout, declining rates of party affiliation and increasing levels of skepticism about politics and politicians.

Some have even talk about a "crisis of democracy." Changing the way we vote, it is hoped, could help solve some of these problems.

But if we move away from the current "first past the post" system (FPTP), as Trudeauhas vowed to do, what will replace it?

• Electoral reform: a primer on the main alternatives to how we vote

On Thursday, four political scientists will face off against each other in Montreal, each making the case for a different option. Democratic Institutions MinisterMaryamMonsef is expected to be in the audience, looking on.

Monsef has spent the past several months traveling around the country gathering inputfrom Canadians on the changes they want to see to the country's electoral system.

There was little consensus among those she talked to, Monsefsaid recently. But the Liberal government will have to decide on an option soon if they want a new system in place for the next election.

Here's an outline of the arguments the political scientistswill use to try to swayMonsef.

• Marc Mayrand urges 'broadest possible' consensus on changing election rules

Alternative Vote (aka ranked or preferential ballot)

This option has, so far, received a lot of consideration, given that Trudeauhimself has expressed support forthe method in the past. It was also used by Parti Qubcoismembers to elect theirnewleader earlier this month.

Voters using this model have the option of ranking candidates on the ballot. Second, third (and so on) choices are redistributed in subsequent rounds of counting, until one candidate emerges with a majority.

• Finding the democratic forest among the electoral reform trees

MarcAndrBodet, who teaches at Universit Laval, will argue for thealternative vote (AV) at Thursday's event.

"It is by far the electoral reform that would be the easiest to implement given the [first past the post system] system we currently use," Bodet said.

Experimental studies conducted recently, he said,suggestAV will reduce disproportionate seat allocationand tactical voting two common complaints of our current system.

"The alternative vote maximizes democratic legitimacy of elected representatives," Bodet added. "It pacifies electoral competition by requiring parties and candidates to consider voters inclined to other parties."

• The Pollcast: Liberals shift on electoral reform what now?

Proportional representation

This methodof electing politicians is popular among those who claim the current make-up of Parliament is unrepresentative of the population at large.

Under FPTP,not only do minority groups tend to be under-represented, but parties can end up with adisproportionate share of seats in the House of Commons.

• Maryam Monsef's earnest guide to electoral reform for cynics

"The main argument in favor of PR is that it is fair," said AndrBlais, a professor at the Universit de Montral who will chairthe debate."If a party has 20 per centof the votes it gets 20 per centof the seats in the House of Commons."

Others claim that the prospect of more equitable outcomes is likely to encourage more people to vote.

At the same time, PR decreases the sense that votes are wasted when a favoured candidate doesn't win his or her seat.

Since seats in Parliament would be allocated proportionally, every vote for a party would influence their seat share.

• Canadians want proportional representation when it comes to electoral reform, NDP says

Mixed-member proportional

This is a variant of PR, and has been the alternative that the NDP has traditionally advocated. It's also used in New Zealand'sParliament.

Voters get to chose both a party and a candidate on a ballot. The House of Commons would thus be mostly composed of politicians who win their ridings with a plurality of votes, like the current system.

But a certain number of seats would be allocated based on aparty's share of the popular vote, withthe candidates taken from a predetermined list.

As such, said Blais, it compensates for one of the criticism often leveled at PR:that it breaks the relationship that politicians forge with the geographical areas they represent.

• MPs devoting the summer to electoral reform; a look at what they've heard so far

First past the post (aka, status quo)

Or maybe there's justno improving on the system we have in place now.That's the position taken by the University of Toronto'sPeterLowen, who lauds its ability to make governments accountable.

"Canada is a difficult country to govern," Lowen said.

"FPTPhas allowed for a 149-year run of uninterrupted democraticelections because it creates incentives for parties to integrate competing regional and social demands, while punishingparties which do not."

Moreover, FPTP'stendency to allot a disproportionate number of seats in relation to vote share canbe seen as an asset, according to Lowen.

"BecauseFPTPtypically returns strong, single party governments, it allows governments the flexibility to respond to changing public opinion," he said.

• How electoral reform is like the Stanley Cup finals

The Public Forum on Electoral Reform, organized by McGill'sCentre for the Study of Democratic Citizenship, will be held Thursday at3625 du ParcAvenue. The event begins at 7:30 p.m.