Submission COOPERMAN-1237 (Online)
|
Submission By | James Cooperman |
Address | Chase, BC, Canada |
Organization | |
Date | 20040812 |
Category | Electoral system change |
Abstract
|
I endorse the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) model rather than
the Single Transferable Vote (STV) model for five reasons. [1
page]
|
Submission Content
|
I endorse the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) model, for the
following reasons:
-
It is simpler. There is no need for voters to understand the
other more complex systems proposed.
-
The results tend to better represent the diversity of views
amongst the electorate.
-
Vote counting under the MMP system is transparent and
straight-forward, whereas under the STV system, there are so many
complex steps to go through that it would take much more than 1 day
to achieve final results. This would put volunteer scrutineers at a
distinct disadvantage.
-
Under the MMP system, election results are known within hours
of poll closings so candidates and the public get to know in a
properly timely fashion who will form the government and who will
sit in opposition. The STV system is very complex to administer
following poll closings with its many complex steps, thus it is
subject to error at many points. Results could take days and longer
to become known. The process is anything but transparent because of
the numbers of steps and calculations, which will not be readily
understood by most voters. This could result in many voter errors.
Further, it is not clear if scrutineers, as we know them today,
would be able to participate in all the steps required before a
winner is decided upon.
-
The STV system cannot make the claim to be more democratic than
the MPP system, since the voting system at the polls is in itself
more complex. The more complex any system is, the greater the
probability of error.
|