I am for mixed proportional representation [MMP]
If the article below is for real, then I would get seriously
bent out of shape. Up to now I thought this assembly
was above board in it's integrity, and not simply a front for
Campbell type ideology.
B.C. Vote Reform Could Lock in Right Wing
The Citizens Assembly is mulling a new rural/urban political
apartheid, a
new voting scheme that virtually guarantees right wing governments
in B.C.
Tue., Aug. 10, 2004
By Mitch Anderson
TheTyee.ca website: http://www.thetyee.ca/thindex.htm
The Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform is coming down to the
wire and
things are getting interesting. While this process has generally
been
applauded as a good faith experiment in citizen-led democracy,
an
announcement last week on the selection of the final presenters
has
certainly raised some eyebrows.
Will our celebrated citizen-led process find a cure for B.C.'s
notoriously
dysfunctional electoral system? Or is it instead being corralled
towards
recommending a new, unfair system that is blatantly biased towards
B.C.'s
right wing?
Time will tell but the need for public input has never been more
urgent. The
final deadline for written submissions to the Assembly is August
13. This is
the last chance for the general public to influence what may be the
most
important decision in B.C. in years.
Wild swings, wasted votes
In order to understand where we are now, some background is
needed.
There is little doubt about the need for an overhaul of our
"first-past-the-post" system, which often wildly skews electoral
results. In
the 2001 election, the B.C. Liberals got 58 percent of the popular
vote and
97 percent of the seats.
Worse still, our winner-take-all system leads to a huge number of
wasted
votes. In a given riding, those who did not vote for the winner may
as well
have not voted at all. In B.C. provincial elections between 1980
and 2001 a
stunning 49.6 percent of British Columbians effectively wasted
their vote by
not contributing to the election of any candidate.
The assembly will decide this fall on which voting system will
provide the
best remedies for these ills. B.C. voters will approve or reject
the
Assembly's recommendation in a referendum on the 2005 election
ballot. The
stakes, to say the least, are high.
Of the competing electoral systems, there are three main contenders
.
The good: Mixed member proportional representation (MMP), an
electoral
system used widely around the world with a proven track record of
producing
fairer results while maintaining geographic representation and
improving the
number of women and minorities elected
The bad: Keeping the system we have - a good option for those who
enjoy wild
swings in public policy and poisonous public debate.
The ugly: Single transferable vote (STV) - used for parliamentary
elections
only in Malta and Ireland, it is so notoriously difficult to
explain that I
won't even try.
Clever bid for political apartheid
The dark horse in this race is a both bad and ugly. Former Socred
MLA Nick
Loenen is advancing a model, called "Preferential-Plus", which
should be
given top marks for sheer audacity. This system would maintain our
current
winner-take-all system in rural B.C. where the right is marginally
stronger,
and use an entirely separate system of STV in urban areas where
the
political right and left share support. Given the way votes
split
geographically in the province, this clever scheme of political
apartheid
would virtually guarantee right wing governments in B.C. until the
end of
time.
If people are not both terrified and appalled by this proposal,
they should
be.
STV, at least in theory, can create proportional results and
remains a
darling of some electoral reform academics. In practice however it
doesn't
always results in a parliament that reflects of the people's will.
Such a
circumstance resulted in a constitutional crisis in Malta in 1981
when the
party with the majority of the vote failed to win the majority of
the seats.
That sounds sadly similar to the system we are trying to get away
from.
The two countries where STV is used exclusively at the national
level also
have very low representation of elected women - 9 percent in Malta
and 12
percent in Ireland - largely because of the mechanics of the
system. Many
would ask: if we going to go to the trouble of changing our system,
why
would chose a system that has one of the worst records worldwide
for
involving women in the political process?
Case for proportional representation
Which brings us to some form of mixed proportional representation.
Used
widely around the world, its main advantage is that it preserves
local
representation while also ensuring that elected seats more
accurately
reflect the popular vote. This last concept might be hard for most
British
Columbians to wrap our heads around but hopefully with time we will
get used
to this happy new reality.
Under proportional representation, minority and coalitions rather
than
simple majority, governments are far more likely. Because different
parties
know that they may one day have to work together, the public debate
tends to
be more respectful than the embarrassing spectacles seen regularly
in
Victoria. Coalitions also mean that governments are much more
accountable to
the people between elections - not just on voting day.
Countries that use MMP also have better representation from women -
up to
42 percent in Sweden. It has also been shown to significantly
increase voter
participation - over 80 percent in countries such as Denmark,
Sweden, and
the Belgium.
Furthermore, countries using proportional representation tend to
have more
balanced governments and a far greater diversity of voter choice.
Fringe
parties that have held sway in countries such as Israel and Italy
can be
excluded by establishing a reasonable threshold of popular vote in
order to
win a seat.
Assembly agenda stacked?
All of this sounds great but it doesn't mean it will happen.
The latest chapter of the Citizens Assembly process unfolded
recently and it
has many British Columbians more than a little alarmed. Last week
the
Assembly chose nine people out of 80 applicants to make formal
presentations
as part of their final public consultation in September and their
choices
were interesting to say the least.
About 80 percent of the more than oral and written submissions
posted to the
web site so far have been in favour of some form of proportional
representation: only 12 percent were in favour of STV (including a
curious
dozen or so Brits and Aussies who wrote in) or some other form
of
preferential voting and a mere 3 percent were in favour of the
status quo.
Did the formal presenters chosen this week by the Citizens
Assembly
accurately reflect the public input so far? Not even close.
Loosely put, four of the nine have stated a preference for STV or
some other
form of preferential voting, three favour some form of
proportional
representation, and two want to keep the system the way it is. Also
of note:
only two of the nine presenters selected are women - ironically the
same as
the number of presenters who are former Socred MLAs. Lastly, Nick
Loenen's
bizarre proposal enjoys the support of two of the nine, one of whom
is Mr.
Loenen himself.
Why did the Assembly choose the presenters they did? Hopefully
their choice
was merely an effort to ensure that the Assembly heard from the
three
contending systems. But it is certainly more important than ever
that the
people of B.C. speak loud and clear to the assembly that we expect
them to
honour their commitment to listen to the public.
Last chance to weigh in
Should we be concerned about all this? You bet. This process is
getting down
to the wire and it is no exaggeration to say that the political
future of BC
hangs in the balance. The Assembly could chose to recommend any
number of
things, depending on what they hear from the public and how many
people say
it.
Which brings us back to what you can do. Simply put, make a
written
submission to the Citizens Assembly before Aug 13th . It is your
last
chance to have your say. Otherwise you might just end up with
something you
didn't bargain for.
Mitch Anderson is a Vancouver writer who is sick of B.C.'s wild
electoral
swings.
levelCMS