Wasted Votes

Charge: STV does not mean an end to so-called wasted votes and would actually make some votes worth less. Some voters would have their vote dead-ended; their vote stopping with their first preference so not counting towards getting anyone elected nor being transferred to another candidate. Other voters would help to elect more than one MLA as their vote was fractionally transferred to several candidates.

It is impossible to guarantee that every single vote contributes to helping a candidate get elected but the vast majority of voters will end up with an MLA they voted for under STV, in contrast to roughly half us now under FPTP. All votes are equally important as everybody gets one vote and it is never worth more or less than one vote.

If your first choice is holding a candidate in contention right up until the end then your further preferences would not be available to be transferred to another candidate. Your vote is already being used and it is serving a worthy purpose of holding your candidate in contention. The other voter who helps to elect more than one MLA is still doing that with just one vote. The keyword is ‘fractionally’… their contributions to the different MLAs that get elected does not mathematically exceed one. Half of your vote may go to your first choice, enough for them to get elected, then a quarter may go to your second choice, helping them get elected, and finally the last quarter may go to your third choice… but in the end, it is just one vote just like everyone else’s.

Furthermore, significantly more votes are considered with STV than with FPTP. Under FPTP all votes going to somebody other than who was elected are completely disregarded and this is frequently over 50 %. Consider the Delta South Riding from the 2005 election as an example, the liberal candidate won with 37.48 % of the votes. Thus, 62.52 % of the votes were disregarded entirely or wasted under FPTP which is very high. In this riding, 62.52 % of voters supported candidates that were not elected. With STV, at least some of those 62.52 % of votes would be considered for second or third choices. The consequence is far less wasted votes under STV.

Comment by David Huntley (1),

“… each voter has exactly one vote, and it remains as exactly one vote at all stages of the counting. Nobody's vote counts for any more or any less than anyone else's.”

D. Huntley and M. Wortis wrote (2),

"Under FPTP, it is usually the case that less than 50 % of the votes are for the candidate who is elected. By contrast, under STV about 90% of the votes in a six-member riding will have contributed to the election of at least one MLA. Thus a far higher number of voters will feel they are represented in the legislature, and this should contribute to increased voter participation and satisfaction."

(1) The Citizens’ Assembly got it right by David Huntley, http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/01/09/STV2009/?utm_source=mondayheadlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=120109

(2)Proportional Representation, Local Representation and More Voter Choice by David Huntley and Michael Wortis, http://www.stv.ca/download/BCSTV_Huntley_Wortis.pdf