2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum
Canadian provincial referendum
A non-binding referendum on electoral reform was held in the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island between 27 October – 7 November 2016. This was the second electoral reform referendum to be held in Prince Edward Island, following a vote to maintain the status quo in 2005. The referendum asked which of five voting systems residents would prefer to use in electing members to the Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island. The referendum used Instant-runoff voting. Four rounds were held. This brought the options down to just two, where mixed member proportional representation was the majority choice with 55.03% support of the total 35,287 active votes, while first past the post had 45 per cent of those votes. Exhausted votes had grown to 1753 by that point. MMP's vote tally at the end was equivalent to 52.42% of the votes cast in the first round.
The plebiscite suffered from low voter turnout. Despite the variety of voting options and a long polling period, the 36.46% turnout was low by PEI standards.
“2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum” enters the record as canadian provincial referendum. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Prince, Edward and Island can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Prince, Edward and Island provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q28233107. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2016, 2005 and 1753.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow 2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum primary sources, 2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum archive and Prince research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “2016 Prince Edward Island electoral reform referendum” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.