Editing Mixed-member proportional representation (section)

===Proposals for use===
====Canada====
{{see also|Electoral reform in Canada}}

In March 2004, the [[Law Commission of Canada]] proposed a system of MMP,{{sfn|Law Commission of Canada|2004}} with only 33% of MPs elected from regional open lists, for the [[House of Commons of Canada]]<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.elections.ca/res/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=129&lang=e |title=A Mixed-Member Proportional System Applied to the 2004 Election|author1-link=Henry Milner (political scientist)|last=Milner|first=Henry|date=January 2005|publisher=Elections Canada On-Line |work=Electoral Insight}}</ref> but Parliament's consideration of the Report in 2004–05 was stopped after the 2006 election. The [[New Democratic Party]] has been a longtime supporter of MMP. The [[Green Party of Canada]] has generally been a staunch supporter of a move to a [[Proportional representation|proportional]] electoral system. In June 2016, the [[Canadian House of Commons Special Committee on Electoral Reform]] was formed to examine potential changes to the voting system with MMP being one of the options examined. The committee presented its report to Parliament on 1 December of the same year. In early 2017, the Government announced that it would accept only some of the committee's recommendations, and would not pursue the issue of electoral reform any further.<ref name="G&M reform abandon">{{Cite news |title=Trudeau abandons electoral reform, breaking key campaign promise |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-abandons-electoral-reform/article33855925/ |access-date=2017-02-06 |newspaper=The Globe and Mail |language=en-ca}}</ref><ref name="cbc response story">{{cite news |last1=Wherry |first1=Aaron |date=April 4, 2017 |title=Liberals say no to mandatory and online voting |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-mandatory-online-voting-1.4054412 |access-date=April 4, 2017 |work=CBC News}}</ref>

* '''Prince Edward Island:''' A proposal to adopt MMP with closed province-wide lists for elections to the [[Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island]] was defeated in a [[2005 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum|referendum]] in 2005, and in [[2019 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum|a subsequent referendum]] in 2019. In a non-binding [[2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum|plebiscite]] between 27 October and 7 November 2016, Prince Edward Islanders voted for MMP over FPTP in the final round of counting, 52%–43%; however, the provincial government, despite having set no [[voter turnout]] threshold, subsequently claimed that the 36 percent turnout was insufficient to change the electoral system.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Bradley |first1=Susan |date=7 November 2016 |title=P.E.I. plebiscite favours mixed member proportional representation |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/mixed-member-proportional-representation-in-plebiscite-1.3840172 |access-date=7 April 2017 |work=CBC News}}</ref> A [[2019 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum|second referendum]], held simultaneously with the [[2019 Prince Edward Island general election|provincial election]], saw MMP rejected by a margin of 48% in favor to 52% against, with 76% turnout.
* '''Ontario:''' In 2007, the [[Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform (Ontario)|Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform]] in [[Ontario]], Canada, also recommended the use of MMP in future elections to the [[Legislative Assembly of Ontario]], with a ballot similar to New Zealand's, and with the closed province-wide lists used in New Zealand but with only 30% compensatory members. [[2007 Ontario electoral reform referendum|A binding referendum]] on the proposal, held in conjunction with the [[2007 Ontario provincial election|provincial election]] on 10 October 2007, saw it defeated.<ref>For further details on the recent proposals in Ontario, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island, see Andre Barnes and James R. Robertson, ''[http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/researchpublications/prb0417-e.htm Electoral Reform Initiatives in Canadian Provinces]'', Library of Parliament, revised 18 August 2009.</ref>
* '''British Columbia:''' During October–December 2018, [[British Columbia]] [[2018 British Columbia electoral reform referendum|held a referendum]] on proportional representation,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Elections BC - 2018 Referendum on Electoral Reform |url=https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181116023902/https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/ |archive-date=16 November 2018 |access-date=14 September 2018}}</ref> promised as part of the election platform of the [[BC NDP|British Columbia New Democratic Party]] who took office following the [[2017 British Columbia general election|May 2017 provincial election]]. In the referendum citizens were presented with two questions. The first question asked them to choose whether they would like to keep [[first-past-the-post voting]] or change to [[proportional representation]]. The second question asked them to rank three types of proportional voting systems in order of preference; one of those was MMP.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Elections BC - Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) |url=https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/voting-systems/mixed-member-proportional-mmp/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180821093857/https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/voting-systems/mixed-member-proportional-mmp/ |archive-date=21 August 2018 |access-date=14 September 2018}}</ref> Citizens could still rank the voting systems even if they selected [[first-past-the-post voting]] in the first question. According to official results, voters chose FPTP over PR by 61.3% to 38.7% on the first question. While the first question was not successful for PR, the second question resulted in MMP winning over the two other systems on the ballot. If PR had been successful on the first question, MMP would have been adopted in time for the next provincial election and would have been subject to a second referendum after two election cycles.
* '''Quebec:''' In September 2019, Quebec's government, supported by two of the three opposition parties (PQ and Quebec Solidaire), introduced a [[43rd Quebec general election#Electoral reform referendum|referendum]] on MMP to be held in 2022. However, on April 28, 2021, Justice Minister [[Sonia LeBel]] informed a legislative committee hearing that the government would not move forward with a referendum on electoral reform in 2022. LeBel blamed the [[COVID-19 pandemic in Quebec|COVID-19 pandemic]] for altering the government's timeline and could not or would not commit to providing an alternate date for the referendum, effectively ending discussions about electoral reform in Quebec.<ref name="EndOfReform">{{cite news |last=Montpetit |first=Jonathan |date=April 28, 2021 |title=Quebec backtracks on promise, no referendum on electoral reform in 2022 |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-electoral-reform-referendum-2022-1.6005897 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210428204943/https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-electoral-reform-referendum-2022-1.6005897 |archive-date=April 28, 2021 |access-date=April 28, 2021 |work=CBC Montreal}}</ref>

==== Other countries ====
* '''Costa Rica:''' Costa Rica was debating the switch from the current [[closed party list]] [[proportional representation]] system to a mixed member proportional representation based on the [[Elections in Germany#Election system|German model]]. The bill presented by the Citizen Power Now movement and endorsed by the majority of parliamentary groups would create two types of deputies; 42 elected proportionally by lists presented by the political parties and would be called "national" deputies, while another 42 deputies would be elected directly by population-based [[electoral district]]s on a [[First pass the post|First past the post]] basis.<ref name="poder">{{cite news|last1=Ramírez|first1=Alexander|title=Grupo propone aumentar a 84 el número de diputados|url=https://www.crhoy.com/nacionales/grupo-propone-aumentar-a-84-el-numero-de-diputados/|agency=CRHoy|date= 2016}}</ref> As the bill requires a constitutional reform it would require a two-thirds majority of votes, however as of 2019 the caucuses of the four main parties supported the reform.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Carmona |first1=Fiorella |title=Congreso se acerca al cambio en sistema de elección de diputados |url=https://www.pulsocr.com/congreso-se-acerca-al-cambio-en-sistema-de-eleccion-de-diputados/ |access-date=28 March 2019 |agency=Revista Pulso |date=29 March 2019}}</ref>
* '''Hungary:''' In 2017, the Common Country Movement (KOM) proposed introducing seat linkage to achieve MMP in the National Assembly, but the bill brought to parliament by five opposition parties was dismissed by the governing coalition.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2017-10-16 |title=Itt a Közös Ország új választójogi tervezete |trans-title=Here is the new Electoral Bill of the Common Country |url=http://index.hu/belfold/2017/10/16/kozos_orszag_mozgalom_valasztojogi_reform/ |access-date=2022-05-15 |website=[[Index.hu]] |language=hu}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=2017. évi törvény az országgyűlési képviselők választásáról |trans-title=Act of 2017 on the election of members of parliament |url=https://4cdn.hu/kraken/raw/upload/74XL5b7V8nhA.pdf |website=4cdn.hu |language=hu}}</ref>

* '''Sri Lanka:''' In September 2015, [[Sri Lanka]]n Foreign Minister [[Mangala Samaraweera]] announced that they will change the country's system to MMP.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.adaderana.lk/news/32423/new-electoral-system-based-on-german-model-mangala|title=New electoral system based on German Model - Mangala|website=www.adaderana.lk}}</ref>

* '''South Africa:''' The Van Zyl Slabbert Commission on Electoral Reform (published in January 2003)<ref>{{Cite web |last=Van Zyl Slabbert |first=Frederik |title=Report of the Electoral Task Team |url=https://pmg.org.za/files/Van-Zyl-Slabbert_Commission_Report.pdf |access-date=15 October 2023 |website=Parliamentary Monitoring Group}}</ref> recommended that a multi-member system, which has been adopted for municipal elections, be expanded to elections for the [[National Assembly of South Africa|National Assembly]]. It proposed that 300 of 400 members be elected from closed-constituency lists (from 69 national multi-member constituencies) and 100 members from closed, national-level party lists. Parliament's High Level Panel report of 2017, chaired by former president [[Kgalema Motlanthe]], validated the Van Zyl Slabbert mixed-system and recommended its adoption, stating: "Such a system will serve to limit the power of individual party leaders and encourage MPs to vote in accordance with the needs and desires of their constituencies rather than only following party lines".<ref>{{Cite web |last=High Level Panel on the Assessment of Key Legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change |date=November 2017 |title=Report of the High Level Panel on the Assessment of Key Legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change |url=https://www.parliament.gov.za/storage/app/media/Pages/2017/october/High_Level_Panel/HLP_Report/HLP_report.pdf}}</ref> Although a constitutional amendment is not required, and a simple majority in parliament can amend the Electoral Act (No. 73 of 1998) it seems unlikely that such an amendment will come before parliament before the 2019 General Elections. A former MP, Michael Louis, who wishes to stand as an independent, is actively pursuing a judicial route to force an amendment.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/can-independents-run-for-national-sa-elections-concourt-says-yes-20180824|title=Can independents run for national SA elections? ConCourt says yes|first=Paul|last=Herman|website=News24}}</ref> The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) has stated that it is not opposed to an amendment but there is simply not enough time to implement it in time for the 2019 elections. After the [[Constitutional Court of South Africa]] declared the Electoral Act unconstitutional in 2020 because there was no way for independent candidates to be elected and in 2021, [[Minister of Home Affairs (South Africa)|Home Affairs Minister]] [[Aaron Motsoaledi]] told [[Parliament of South Africa|Parliament]] that a new electoral system must be put in place, calls for MMP intensified and a Motsoaledi-appointed, [[Valli Moosa]]-led ministerial advisory committee was formed to determine the new system.

==== European Union (European Parliament) ====
The pan-European party [[Volt Europa|VOLT Europa]] proposes transnational mixed-member proportional representation with the combination of [[Majority judgment|Majority Judgment]] and [[Party-list proportional representation|party-list PR]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Volt's Electoral Reform Policy: Making Europe More Democratic |url=https://assets.volteuropa.org/2021-12/Electoral%20Reform%20Policy%20October%202021.pdf}}</ref>