Submission RUSSELL-0761 (Online)

Here is the submission I wished to present at the Kelowna meeting, I was unable to print off my ramblings in my rush before the meeting:

I support the first-past-the-post electoral system. Why? Because I believe that both provincial and federal elected officials should be elected on the same basis as we elect our city councilors. We elect our municipal officials first on the basis of who the candidate is, meaning their experience and character, and second on the basis of what they represent, meaning their political views, policy objectives, and most importantly in the case of reelection, their political record and community representation.

Because of political parties, federal and provincial elections are a hybrid: we pass judgement not only on each candidate but also on each party. Therefore, every candidate must be closely scrutinized for their individual experience and character but also the record of their political party. It is most democratic if this scrutiny takes place at the community level on a candidate-by-candidate basis.

The first-past-the-post system best reflects this hybrid reality. The character and record of a candidate may be judged highly but if it does not outweigh the political view and record of the political party they represent, the candidate will have trouble getting elected.

Two recent examples reflect this reality. In 1993, a negative judgement of individual MPs and general frustration with how the government was being run led to the federal Progressive Conservatives being knocked down to two seats. And in 2001, here in BC the NDP was also knocked down to two seats mostly because of immense dissatisfaction with their governance, although there was some dissatisfaction with the character of individual MLAs.

Under any form of proportional representation that vital link between a candidate's character and record and the views and record of their political party is severed. With PR, these important characteristics are judged separately and then artificially reconciled. The result is simple not as clear a reflection of an individual voter's intentions as under a first-past-the-post system.

Under normal circumstances, on a riding-by-riding basis and in the eyes of the voter, the candidate with the highest combined potency of proper individual characteristics and proper political affiliation will be elected. The provincial legislature should be and is filled with politicians who were given a mandate by their individual communities on the basis of their individual character and their political affiliation.

Next election, the BC Liberals will most likely lose some seats to the NDP. How many seats they lose will be a result of their political record and vision compared to the NDP, but also how each riding judges the character and effort put forth by each MLA. This form of direct evaluation is simply not possible with proportional representation.

In closing, prior to elections, riding associations of each party put forth the candidate they believe to be best alternative. During the election, the character and record of the candidate combined with the record of their political party is evaluated at the local level. A so-so party should only get a seat in the legislature if they have a superior candidate and a so-so candidate should only get a seat if they are part of a superior party. Proportional representation lets so-so candidates and so-so parties get into the legislature thereby making it function in a less effective and concentrated manner.

Do not vote for a party, do not vote for an individual, combine the two criteria then vote. If your not happy with your choices, get involved at the local level and create better parties and nominate better candidates. The electoral system is fine the way it is. We have simply forgotten the reality of the vital link between individual character, individual initiative, and political parties.