|
Submission KENNEDY-0767 (Online)
|
Submission By | Mr. John Kennedy |
Address | Burnaby, BC, Canada |
Organization | |
Date | 20040628 |
Category | Democratic elections, Democratic government |
Abstract
|
We have deficits of legitimacy, fairness, and equality after
every Provincial election. The solution is
Parliamentary PR, where each MLA casts a vote in
proportion to the votes he or she gained at the previous election.
[3 pages]
|
Submission Content
|
WHY WE NEED PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
Summary
We have a deficit of legitimacy, a deficit of fairness, and a
deficit of equality after every Provincial election. Proportional
representation cures these ills. The best form of PR is
Parliamentary Vote PR.
The Opponents
I was amused to read on the CA's website that Jim avowed that the
only thing that he and Glen could agree on was that proportional
representation was for losers. I was not surprised. Not only did
Jim's statement not prove that PR is for losers, but it did prove
that he and Glen are on the same page: "It's all about me, the
politician. It's all about whether I win or lose." I could not
disagree more. Elections and electoral systems are all about the
citizens and their votes.
As in New Zealand, we will find the staunchest opponents to PR
amongst the political elite, and the business elite who bankroll
them and their campaigns. Power junkies and control freaks do not
willingly turn over decision-making to the voters. It has been
quiet so far. Expect a howl when you make your recommendations. No
matter what you are throwing, you are throwing it into the fan.
It is equally important to bear in mind that fixing an electoral
system does not fix everything. It is heartening to learn that
after adopting MMP, the Kiwis still rank politicians with used car
salesmen, when it comes to credibility.
The Deficit of Legitimacy
We have successful votes, and we have "wasted" votes. Wasted votes
are votes that have not contributed to the election of a candidate.
There are two kinds of wasted votes: votes cast for parties
successful somewhere else; and votes cast for parties and
independents not successful anywhere.
While voters who have cast successful votes are pleased, voters who
have cast wasted votes become frustrated, cynical, and apathetic.
These voters feel, quite rightly, that their views are not getting
the voice and respect they deserve. Even the winners of the
election suffer from a serious percentage of illigitimacy, the
percentage of wasted votes.
In the landslide election of 2001, where the Liberals won 77 of 79
seats, there were over 672,000 wasted votes -- more than 42% of the
total votes cast.
In the normal election of 1991, where the NDP won 39 of 75 seats,
there were over 808,000 wasted votes -- more that 55% of the total
votes cast.
In the contentious election of 1996, where the NDP won 39 of 75
seats, there were over 817,000 wasted votes -- nearly 52% of the
total votes cast.
The magnitude of this waste is appalling. And the affront to
legitimacy shocking. Like salmon trying to spawn, we waste about
50% of our votes in any given election. And every government is
about 50% illegitimate. No wonder the voters get a little grumpy,
Stephen Hume.
We need to refine our democracy and overcome this waste and deficit
of legitimacy. We have to focus on the citizens' feelings and their
votes, rather than on the successful candidates and their seats. We
need to count all of the citizens' votes, both successful and
unsuccessful, and make all those votes count on the floor of the
Legislature -- no matter who wins the seat. Have the Party that won
the most votes form the government. Take each Party's votes, divide
them evenly amongst that Party's successful candidates, and let
those MLA's vote their share of those citizens' votes in the
Legislature. That would be Vote Proportional Representation, or
Parliamentary Vote PR.
The Deficit of Fairness
We have warped election results which offend British Columbians'
sense of fairness.
In the landslide election of 2001, the Liberals won nearly 40% more
seats than their popular vote justified. And the NDP won some 19%
less seats than their percentage of popular vote. The cumulative
disproportionality, or deficit of fairness, then was about 59% in
that "landslide".
In the more normal election of 1991, the NDP received over 27% more
seats than they should have. And the Liberals and Socreds together
were short more than 25% of the seats they should have had. The
cumulative disproportionality was nearly 53%.
In the close and contentious election of 1996, the Liberals
received the largest percentage of popular vote, but the NDP won
the most seats and formed the government. Both the Liberals and NDP
won more seats than their votes justified -- the Liberals, 2.18%;
and the NDP,12.55%. The Reform and PDA came up short some 11% of
the seats. The cumulative disproportionality in this close election
was nearly 26%.
Like the deficit of legitimacy, the deficit of fairness is about
50% in most elections. So, results are half unfair, and voter
cynicism is at least half justified. PR would fix it.
The Deficit of Equality
We have unequal voting power between urban and rural ridings. An
urban riding might need five votes for every one vote needed in a
rural riding to elect a candidate. Perhaps a land base adjustment
to votes is needed for rural areas to offset the difference between
what they contribute to the treasury and what they receive in
return.
If we make every citizen's vote count on the Legislature floor,
instead of counting seats, the problem of unequal voting power
evaporates. And in the future, we would be able to increase the
number of rural seats, so as to give the North the voice,
influence, and service it deserves.
Our Reality
The roots of our problems lie in our conventions of translating
votes into seats, assigning each seat a single vote, and having the
Party that won the most seats form the government.
Our conventions grew out of convenience. In the olden days, voting
was by public outcry (aye, nay,etc.). If they were not sure what
the result was "by the sound of things", they had people "stand up
and be counted". They did not care much about the exact count --
they just wanted to know who won. The same approach is still used
today when it serves well enough. Counting was only done out of
necessity. The notion of the popular vote is a fairly new idea from
an historical perspective. But it matters a lot to us nowadays. Our
old conventions do not stand up very well under scrutiny anymore.
In a multiparty system that is ideologically polarized as it is
here in BC, our old conventions give us illigitimate, unfair, and
unequal election results. We need to alter our conventions. I
propose Parliamentary Vote-based Proportional Representation. Vote
PR.
|
|