Re: "Canada can do better to get more women elected, right now we're 60th place in world," (The Hill Times, April 11, p. 11). Nancy Peckford's article seems somewhat confused about the role electoral systems play in balancing representation. Moreover, she doesn't seem to know that the alternative vote (AV) system is not proportional. If she (and her co-author, Grace Lore) had taken a deeper look at the issue, the article would have concluded that proportional representation (PR) is absolutely necessary for women to achieve higher levels of representation. This is demonstrated quite convincingly in Australia where they elect their House of Representatives using the winner-take-all AV system while they elect their Senate using PR. While she decries closed list systems in Australia's Senate elections, almost all voters simply check off the party list. Yet they manage to elect 50 per cent more women to their Senate than to their House. To make matters worse, the ranked ballot she seems to prefer doesn't elect more women to their House than Canada elects to our Parliament. The UN notes that when the percentage of women elected rises above 30 per cent, women's issues start being addressed. It as extremely rare for nations that don't use PR to meet that minimum, while nations that use PR often achieve much higher percentages I didn't recognize any non-PR nations among the 46 who achieved 30 per cent or better in the Inter-Parliamentary Union's 2016 list of women in national parliaments. The U.K. seems to be the best non-PR nation ranking 48. Indeed the PR nations in the EU are almost all more than 30 per cent while the non-PR nations are all below). Another mistake she makes is in believing that parties are obstacles to electing women. In fact, concerted efforts by progressive parties to develop and promote female candidates suggests that parties are part of the solution. The real problem is that our (and Australia's) outdated voting system(s) doesn't elect the women who are nominated because too often they don't elect progressive candidates in the numbers their votes should justify. The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance also notes that both AV and our first-past-the-post system offer little in the way to assist people from underrepresented groups in winning representation. PR systems do much better, as we witness in Afghanistan—which elects a larger proportion of women than Australia (House) and Canada. It's a pity that she didn't consult with Women for Fair Voting (http://www.fairvote.ca/women-for-fair-voting/) prior to deciding that PR isn't the answer. They have done extensive investigation into the links between electoral systems and women's representation and could have pointed her toward more research that counters the conclusions Lore reached. Gary Dale West Hill, Ont.