Pierre Poilievre’s refusal to let his MPs access much-needed housing funds for their communities is a stark example of how winner-takes-all politics fails voters and communities. Instead of prioritizing solutions for the housing crisis, his party is more focused on partisan advantage, even if it means ignoring the needs of Canadians.
This isn’t just a Conservative problem—it’s a systemic flaw of our first-past-the-post system. In a winner-take-all system, every election becomes a zero-sum game where parties will do anything to prevent the other from claiming credit, even if it means holding back progress on critical issues like housing.
How would this change under proportional representation?
Local Representation Reimagined
Under proportional representation, local communities wouldn’t be limited to one MP monopolizing the “voice in Ottawa.” Instead, voters would elect a team of local MPs from different parties, all accountable to their needs. If one MP fails to push for housing funding or make progress on local issues, other elected representatives would be ready to step in. In some cases, local MPs may work together across party lines in the best interests of their area.
Proportional representation fosters cooperation, both locally and in Parliament, helping to ensure that policies to address long-term problems like the housing crisis, climate change and health care have the multi-party support they need for lasting solutions.
Proportional Representation: Fairer, Smarter, More Collaborative
Unlike the divisive nature of first-past-the-post, proportional representation builds collaboration right into the system, giving all voters a voice and a better chance for real solutions.