The Basic Idea of FPTP
Divide the province into tiny ridings, and in each riding the candidate with the most votes gets elected (Often with less than 50%).

Problems:  FPTP has so many problems it's impossible to illustrate them all with one diagram, however this diagram illustrates many of them:

A)  Vote-Splitting,  Large-Party Seat Bonus, and False Majority
Usually the largest party (in this case the red party) wins more than its fair share of seats.  In this case the red party wins most of the seats with under 50% of the votes (a False Majority).  The opposition parties have a majority of support between them, but they split the vote.  Thus who governs is often determined more by vote-splitting than by what voters actually want.  For example, in BC we now have a right-wing government, but had left-wing government under the NDP for 8 years purely because the right was split.  Because of this, there are often large and unpredictable swings in government policy without any corresponding large swings in voter preferences (yoyo politics.  This is bad for business and for everyone else.

B)  Two Party System, Wasted Votes, Orphaned Voters, and Strategic Voting
Because of the, Large-Party Seat Bonus, FPTP tends to lead to a two party system with very little voter choice, since casting a ballot for a smaller party is unlikely to elect anyone, and is thus a 'wasted vote'.  However, geographically localized third parties can do quite well, as demonstrated by the Bloc Quebequois.  In this diagram, red voters in riding 3 and blue, green and purple voters in the other ridings all voted, but their votes (about 50% of all votes) were thrown our by our voting system without electing anyone.  They are 'Orphaned Voters'.  Many of the blue and purple voters may actually be voting strategically for Green or Red candidates to try and make their votes count.

C)  Safe VS Swing Seats: Neglected Voters, and Buying Swing Votes with our Tax Dollars
In this diagram there is only one ridings that is a real contest: Riding number five, which is a 'Swing Riding'.  The result in all the other ridings is a forgone conclusion, since they are 'Safe Seats'.  The green party knows they will win riding 3, and the red party knows they will win ridings 1,2,4, and 6.  This means that the Red and Green parties will focus most of their time and money on winning riding 5, and largely ignore the rest of the ridings!  This is why the Albertan Conservative candidates were campaigning from the central party headquarters rather than in their ridings in Alberta - they knew they were going to get re-elected anyways!  The government may also used our tax dollars to try and 'buy votes' in the few key swing ridings shortly before the election.  Sometimes there are entire regions with lots of swing ridings, which is why the Conservatives spent lots of money in Quebec prior to the last federal election – not because Conservatives love spending money!

D)  Unnaccountable MLAs and Poor Local Representation
Most ridings are safe seats as shown in the diagram.  Parties know they can nominate whomever they want in a safe seat and get them elected, which explains why MLAs listen to their party so much more than to voters – they are not very accountable to voters!  This also explains one aspect of why many of us experience poor local representation.  Another aspect is that many orphaned voters simply do not have a representative they voted for, and their local representative does not understand their concerns.  Finally, even if you were a green voter in riding 3, you still wouldn't have a representative in government.  This is of particular concern when the governing party is shut out of a large region, such as the Conservatives from the big cities and the Liberals from Alberta, and is likely the explanation for why Trudeau's NEP (National Energy Policy) was so disastrous for Alberta.

E)  Is Bad for Women and Minorities
The discrimination against women and minorities occurs in the nomination process, and when just nominating a single individual that must have broad appeal, a white male is not a bad choice.

FPTP divides region against region, and could ultimately help tear Quebec from Canada.

The Basic Idea of BC-STV
Divides the province into ridings that elect 2-7 candidates each, and in each riding the STV voting system represents the diversity of voter preferences in the riding by dividing voters into roughly equal groups with similar preferences. Each of these groups elects and is represented by a candidate they like (one of their top preferences).

A Solution:  BC-STV fixes these problems with FPTP:

A)  No Vote-Splitting,  Strategic Voting, Large-Party Seat Bonus, or False Majority
BC-STV's ranked ballot prevents vote splitting, which means some voters will have to settle for their second choice, like the purple voters in this diagram.  The results are proportional in each riding, as shown in the diagram, so there is no longer a bonus to being a large party, and false majorities are very rare.

B)  Multi-Party System, No Wasted Votes, or Orphaned Voters.
Because multiple candidates are elected on a proportional basis in each riding, BC-STV can accomodate a multi-party system where almost every vote helps elect a candidate, and so almost everyone actually has someone representing them.  There are almost no wasted votes nor orphaned voters.

C)  All ridings are competitive, MLAs are accountable and are very attentive to their constituents, and there are no special 'swing ridings' that receive extra tax dollars.
Under BC-STV all candidates have to work very hard to get elected, because voters can choose from multiple candidates from several parties.  For example, the red party probably ran four candidates in case the election went well, and voters chose which of them got elected.  And if voters didn't like one of the red candidates very much, they may have ranked another parties candidate fourth, instead of the fourth red candidate.  Because of this competition within and between parties' candidates, all candidates are very accountable and attentive to their constituents, and there are no special regions that governments try to buy with our tax dollars.

D)  There is Excellent Local Representation,
Because elections are competitive and politicians are accountable as just described, because everyone has a representative they actually voted for, and every riding has some MLAs who are in government.  Also, because of the competition between multiple candidates in each riding, if one MLA in that riding starts raising a fuss about an issue (like a hospital closing), all of the MLAs will have to rush back to the riding and start discussing it and get their opinion and their picture in the paper – they won't be able to ignore real issues as easily as now.  Constituency work will consist of more than just shaking hands at the Santa Parade and cutting ribbons at the opening of new buildings.

E)  Is Better for Women and Minorities
The discrimination against women and minorities occurs in the nomination process, and under BC-STV the larger parties will be nominating multiple candidates in each riding.  In order to ensure their slate has broad appeal, they will nominate diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, etc.  Voters can then vote across party lines to elect a certain minority if they wish.  For example, Chinese voters may vote for Chinese candidates across party lines to make sure they have some representatives that speak their language and understand their issues.

If implemented federally, STV would no longer strengthen the separatist movement in Quebec.


More Systems
While they aren't on the ballot in BC, some people may be interested in some of the other voting systems that we use or that are/were being considered elsewhere in Canada.  There diagrams and notes on the MMP and Block Voting systems here.  These diagrams are also available for download in power point and pdf formats below.