I already made a submission in favour of Mixed-Member
Proportional Representation (MMP) a number of months ago (
Bancroft
0161). But it has been brought to my attention that the
Assembly may be beginning to tilt in the direction of the Single
Transferable Vote (STV), in spite of the fact that 70 percent of
the submissions so far have favoured MMP. With that in mind, I
would like to more forcefully defend MMP against STV.
It is very important that the Assembly recommend a voting system
that can be broadly agreed upon across the province, considering
the weighted majority that will be needed in order for it to be
accepted. The highly complex nature of STV, as compared to MMP,
seems to preclude this possibility. Furthermore, the great
advantages of proportional representation are the proportionality
it guarantees and the better representation of women and minorities
that it tends to produce. Both these advantages can be seen much
more clearly in MMP than in STV.
I understand that many are concerned about the possible lack of
voter control over the make-up of party lists in MMP. But this
worry can be addressed in many ways -- for example, with the help
of a flexible list system, as suggested by the Law Commission of
Canada. As for the additional concern about "zombies" in the
legislature, I personally do not see why this must be perceived as
such a large problem. Nonetheless, if indeed the election of
"zombies" is widely seen as an unpopular aspect of MMP, I see no
reason why candidates cannot be prohibitted from running in a local
constituency and on a party list at the same time. If this rule is
necessary to keep people as satisfied as possible with MMP, then it
is worth it.
In conclusion, although STV has many aspects that make it quite
interesting and worth serious consideration, it is ultimately not
in this province's interest as a goal of electoral reform. For this
purpose, our best bet is MMP.
levelCMS