Abstract
Canada, India, New Zealand and of course the U.K. itself are among the relatively few democratic countries of the world which continue to employ the Single Member District (SMD), First Past the Post (FPTP) system of elections exclusively and in undiluted form. Once considered the model for the conduct of democratic elections, the inadequacies of the British method of elections have become increasingly evident in recent years, particularly in countries where questions of representation are complex ones and/or where the ability of established political institutions to survive periods of considerable stress may depend in part on the perceived legitimacy of the electoral system. While many countries have adapted both of the SMD or FPTP principles to their needs, or have abandoned the concepts altogether in favour of a system based on Proportional Representation (PR), Canada is one country which has throughout its history resisted any change in its national electoral system. This attachment to its British political traditions has been a costly one, as problems of representation have tended to compound many of the linguistic and regional stresses of the Canadian federation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Butler, D. and D. Stokes (1974). Political Change in Britain. London: MacMillan.
Butler, D. and A. Sloman (1975). British Political Facts: 1900–1975. London: MacMillan.
Butler, D., H. Penniman, and A. Ranney (1981). Democracy at the Polls. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Cairns, A.C. (1968). “The Electoral System and the Party System in Canada”,Canadian Journal of Political Science, 1, 55-80.
Canada, Task Force on Canadian Unity (1979). A Future Together. Ottawa: Dept. of Supply and Services.
Canada, Special Joint Comittee on Senate Reform (1984). Report on Senate Reform. Ottawa: Dept. of Supply and Services.
Canada, Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada (1985). Ottawa: Dept. of Supply and Services.
Clarke, H., J. Jenson, L. Leduc and J. Pammett (1979). Political choice in Canada. Toronto: MacGraw-Hill.
Clarke, H., J. Jenson, L. Leduc and J. Pammett (1984). absent mandate: the Politics of Discontent in Canada. Toronto: Gage.
Courtney, J.C. (1981). “Reflections on Reforming the Canadian Electoral System”, Canadian Public Administration, 14, 427 - 457.
Crewe, I. (1981). “Electoral Volatility in Britain Since 1945”, paper presented to the Workshop on Electoral Volatility, ECPR Joint Sessions, University of Lancaster.
Crewe, I. (1982). “Is Britains Two-Party System Really About to Crumble?”, paper presented to the anual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Crewe, I. (1983). “Dealignment and Realignment in the British Party System: the 1983 General Election”, paper presented to the anual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Dalton, R., S. Flanagan, and P.A. Beck (eds.) (1984). Electoral Change in Industrial Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Drucker, K.M. (ed.)(1979). Multi-Party Britain. New York: Praeger.
Finer, S.S. (1975). Adversary Politics and Electoral Reform. London: Wigram.
Finer, S.S. (1980). The Changing British Party System 1945-1979. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Fox, P. (ed.) (1982). Politics in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill.
Fox, P. (1982). “PR for Canada?”, in Fox P. (ed.), Politics: Canada, Toronto: McGraw-Hill.
Hansard Society (1976). Report of the Hansard Society Comission on Electoral Reform. London: Hansard Society.
Irvine, W. (1979). Does Canada Need a New Electoral System?. Queen’s University, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.
Irvine, W. (1981). “Power Requires Representation”, Policy Options, 4, 20 - 26.
Lakeman,E. (1974). How Democracies Vote. London: Faber.
Landes, R. (1980). “Alternative Electoral Systems for Canada”, paper presented to the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Leduc, L. (1984). “Canada: the Politics of Stable Dealignment”, in: R. Dalton, S. Flanagan, and P.A. Beck (eds.), Electoral Cange in Industrial Democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Milnor, A J. (1969). Elections and Political Stability. Boston: Little-Brown.
Penniman, H. (ed.) (1975). Britain at the Polls. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Penniman, H. (ed.) (1977). Australia at the Polls. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Penniman, H. (ed.) (1981). Britain at the Polls: 1979. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Pulzer, P.G. (1967). Political Representation and Elections in Britain. London: Allen & Unwin).
Rose, R. (1982). The Territorial Dimension in Government. New Jersey: Chatham House.
Sarlvik, B., and I. CREWE (1983). Decade of Dealignment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press )
Williams, S. (1981). Politics is for People. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Leduc, L. (1987). Performance of the Electoral System in Recent Canadian and British Elections: Advancing the Case for Electoral Reform. In: Holler, M.J. (eds) The Logic of Multiparty Systems. International Studies in Economics and Econometrics, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3607-2_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3607-2_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8114-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3607-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive