Democratic Elections and Governance
Abstract
I support the introduction of a modification to our current
voting sytem to use the Preferential/Alternative vote(AV) to allow
voters the choice of ranking their vote for the cadidates in
their riding, and thus allow the
selection of the best candidate by a majority of the voters in all
ridings.
I do not support the suggestions that the First Past The Post
(FPTP) voting system should be radically
changed to a Proportional Representation (PR) or Mixed
Member Proportional (MMP) system of voting without local
ridings, and I also object to the
proposed changes to our established form of governance
in the legislature from one that encourages
majority government to one that encourages
repititious coalition minority governments.
Submission Content
1. Westminster
Governance
The present form of Westminster system of governance that we have
today, depends on the basic right of qualified voters --
citizenship, residency and riding location -- to make
their selection of a candidate to be their electorate
representative (MLA) in their riding, be they party
nominated or are individuals who seek such a position within the BC
Legislature.
It is very disappointing to this participant voter, to see that
in the information available to the public from
the Citizen Assembly website, that very
little attention appears to have been devoted to examining our
present form of government, its fundamentals and operation, and the
role of majority decisions that are essential to ensuring that
leadership and timely governance is provided to the
citizens of BC.
2. Mandate of the Assembly
Naturally, given the mandate of the
Assembly, it is understandable that the Assembly has
concentrated its efforts to date, on examining possible
changes to our current voting system. However, that has resulted in
also highlighting all the different governance options
that appear around the world, some of which have been adapted by
some countries that were similarly founded
on the Westminster system as in BC and Canada.
However, the stated objective of
examining other forms of voting and election of riding
MLAs in BC, with the intention of attempting to improve
voting participation, appears to have led to an overall
examination of quite different types of
governance. This is a much larger issue and one that
has much more fundamental ramifications on our system of government
than simply providing choice in voting.
Some of the changes suggested to BC's present
electoral distribution, include elimination of all ridings,
reduction of riding MLAs or changing the overall structure of the
present riding structure by combining ridings. All of these issues
must be considered as crucial factors in the formation of our
government and particularly in the type and extent of
representation of our voters by our elected
MLAs.
At the Richmond Hearing on May 4, which I attended,
it was confirmed that the mandate of the Assembly has now been
clarified to specifically address their
possible suggestions and final
recommendation to government for a possible referendum-
all on the basis that such changes will improve voter
participation but will:
a) maintain the same number (and
distribution) of ridings as present, and
b) maintain the same number of
MLA's in the legislature
3. First Past The Post (FPTP) -- The
Plurality system
While the present voting system has some drawbacks -- notably that
the choice of voters is restricted to a single vote --
this encourages the selection of a local MLA from one of the
leading political parties. Perhaps,
this discourages those that wish to have a minority
party representative MLA in the Legislature, but are only
able to convince enough voters in a few
ridings that their candidates (and policies) are the
best representatives to be elected as MLA's.
It does, however, have the advantage of allowing individuals to
run for office as Independents as well as party nominees -- an
option that disappears completely with any of the PR party list
systems.
Our current voting system -- within our plurality and riding
electorate system -- is straightforward, easily
understood by voters and immediately effective in all
but a few cases where recounts may
be required. It produces the
voters' selection of a nominated candidate to be the provincial
voice of a particular riding in the legislature. It is the founding
block of our elective governmental system.
To the credit of Elections BC, the independent body appointed
by, and reporting to the Legislature, that the actual voting
procedures and system, and the rules that govern
it, have resulted in few problems for the
voters or in establishing the winning candidates in each riding.
The simplicity of our voting system and its efficiency must be seen
as one of the keys to it's success.
Any voting system that is devised cannot be seen as perfect for
all time but may require updating to ensure that it
remains fair and equitable for all the voters and provides
the best outcome for all -- voters and other
citizens alike -- and of course the selected MLAs who are entrusted
to form the government of the day on our behalf.
With the establishment of the BC Citizens' Assembly, it is
certainly an appropriate time for us to consider improving our
current system and that should be to enhance our current Plurality
system to allow the voters to directly express their opinion and
preference for their riding MLA and all the
candidates.
This is achieved by modifying the current
voting system to provide the Alternate Vote system
(AV).
4. The Alternate Vote (AV) -- Majority
Voting and Voter Choice
The adoption of the Alternate Vote in conjunction with our
existing voting system will provide BC citizens with
the means to express their opinions directly at the same time as
they register their vote for their MLA, so that every
MLA represents the majority of all voters in the particular riding
in which multiple candidates are competing for such position.
It eliminates the possibility of MLAs being elected by a
minority of the votes cast in any riding, by allowing each voter to
simply rank all (or some) of the listed candidates in the order
of preference that they wish as their MLA. This system
provides an across the board opinion of the voters as to the
suitability of each candidate and their political views and party
connections (if any).
While the voting system is somewhat more involved than our
current single vote, it certainly will be a definite improvement
that gives all voters an opportunity to express their opinions, and
choice in the voting booths that currently is not
available.
The AV system ensures that where no single candidate receives a
clear majority of all the registered votes in each riding, that an
automatic recount of the ranked candidates is carried
out under the supervision of Elections BC to establish the
specific best preference of all the
voters.
5. Proportional Representation
(PR)
In my opinion, any consideration of adopting PR
forms of voting and governance should also examine the
downstream political ramifications that such suggested models would
have on our existing form of governance.
Do we really want to emulate the experience of countries such as
Italy -- or even Israel -- where governments rise and fall and
elections are held at a dizzying pace, and governments are formed
on the basis of coalitions of numerous minority
parties? Do we want a never ending debating society in
Victoria with no apparent decision making capacity to govern?
I think not.
PR appears to lead, inevitably, to
coalitions of minorities that paradoxically provide effective
control of government to these minority (parties))
through the necessity of party deal making coalitions. But this
does not result in the voters receiving the full benefits
of transparent and effective responsibility that is
directly attributable under a majority government.
The adoption of the PR system, certainly raises the question of
its reliance on the use of party closed lists from
which the electors inherit individuals as their MLA's on
a random basis without the normal
voter scrutiny through general public joint
candidate meetings. It also raises the distinct
possibility that those named by the party to such lists are simply
named as nominees within their own parties as a reward for strictly
party loyalty or support without perhaps even satisfying
any kind of internal democratic party nomination process.
The use of STV is also highly problematic and complicated, as it
involves large lists of potential candidates from a multiplicity of
areas/ridings (if they exist at all under the PR system). Voters
are accustomed to having a general knowledge of their local riding
candidates, but extending that idea beyond each current riding is a
futile exercise that no one should even
attempt.
There have been some misguided submissions and presentations
that suggest obliquely that, by having a PR system that this would
allow correction of certain under-represented minority
groups by special seat allocations either directly by
quotas. or through party lists. The Canadian culture allows for
equal opportunity for all citizens to seek public office without
necessity for such measures which are
repugnent to me and I am sure, to most of my
fellow citizens.
The use of popular votes on a Province wide basis to select MLAs on
a party's percentage of the popular vote, closed party lists, and
no local riding votes is patently unacceptable and should be
excluded entirely from any serious consideration by the
Assembly.
6. Mixed Member Proportional
(MMP)- New Zealand
The New Zealand experience in adopting a form of MMP
in 1996 (after 12 years of discussions and two referendums) has
been touted by many submissions as one that we should consider and
adopt, a suggestion that I do not agree with for various
reasons.
Unfortunately, the Assembly's briefing facts provided on the
website, containing only summary information on the
various families of voting sytems, does not provide a very
extensive or detailed summary of the MMP specifics now
adopted by New Zealand. Nor does it outline the impact
of these changes on that country's governance which has gone from a
clear two party majority system to a six party minority government
after three consecutive federal elections, in 1996, 1999 and
2002
However, thanks to Katherine Gordon's
submission (ID 0234) with appropriate references to
other websites, I have gleaned some extensive
information on that country's MMP system, but do not agree with her
conclusion that this system is an excellent example that
BC should copy.
The fact that it took such a long time to achieve a
so-called majority acceptance of changing their governance
structure and its required voting system is an indicator and
warning to BC voters and the Assembly, that changes of this
magnitude can be very divisive. The final tally on
NZ's second binding referendum to accept MMP
was ;
YES
53.9 %
NO
46.1 %
VOTERS
85.2 %
A very narrow margin of plurality, but stll not an absolute
majority of all the eligible voters. In fact it
represents only 45.9% of all eligible voters!
Claims that these adopted MMP voting and
governance changes have led NZ to an increase in their
voting participation rates by the public are
quite misleading, as NZ has clearly enjoyed
higher rates under their former
system, prior to the introduction of their MMP system.
See "Case Study: New Zealand" by Nigel Roberts -- from a high of
97.6 % in 1946 to 85.2% in 1993, under their FPTP system
and, from 88.26% in 1996 to 76.98 % in 2002 under the MMP
system.
In fact the overall rates of voter participation in NZ (in
the range of 80 % to 95 %) far outstrips those in
BC, leading one to wonder whether NZ also
has adopted Australia's practice of enforcing it's
mandatory voting for all eligible voters, as a fundamental
responsibility of citizenship! We enact laws to ensure that we
drive safely on our roads. Why do we not also
require our BC citizens to accept their
citizenship's responsibility by voting every four years
?
In addition, the adoption of a measure of proportionality in NZ
's MMP voting system (51 seats out of 120) has resulted
in the following very significant changes in their previous voting
system and governance ;
a) an increase of 21 seats
in their legislature -- from 99 to 120
b) the number of assigned riding seats
(with a presumed increase in the size of the new ridings) has
decreased from approximately 94 seats to 69
c) the number of
PR unassigned seats which are now
distributed on the basis of party closed lists is
currently set at 51
d) the number of quota seats for the
Maori (NZ aboriginals) has increased from 4 to 13
e) there has been marked
differences and confusion created between local electorate members
and those assigned by PR distribution
f) forming a government after closing
of the voter polls has gone from overnight under FPTP, to some nine
weeks after the PR seats are assigned under MMP. And this is
only concluded after
a written agreement (the latest
was 60 pages long) is signed between the various
coalition parties, undoubtedly without any voter input or knowledge
to this post election deal.
Surely, while there are many apparent similarities between BC
and New Zealand (the populations are both approximately 4 million),
it is well to ponder on whether any comparison of BC's
Provincial politics, geography, economy or population
diversity is at all relevant to New Zealand's
(national) government and its characteristics.
For instance, If the geographic size of BC (948,000 sq km) is
compared to New Zealand (269,000 sq km) in order to have
the same current MMP representation as NZ, we would have to
increase the number of MLA's in the legislature from 79 to a total
of 450!
The NZ government is required to hold national elections no
later than every 3 years, while here in BC our provincial
government are now required to hold elections every 4 years,
barring any unusual conditions that would require them to call an
earlier election, Quite a significant difference and likely to be
even more so under the difficulties of forming constant MMP
coalition governments that frequently self-destruct
before their term is completed as is seen by actual experiences in
many other countries.
The result of these massive changes to the voting system and
governance under the MMP format in New Zealand has been (as
predicted by some) three consecutive minority governments, While
some in BC might argue that this is exactly what we need, I for one
, do not agree that such a system is beneficial for good government
in BC and certainly does not provide the degree of
accountability that we presently enjoy or require.
7. The Role of Parties in the
Legislature
While some have speculated that political parties, and particularly
party discipline, are a deterrant to good government. I am not
overly concerned on this issue so long as MLAs and MPs are provided
with a reasonable amount of flexibility to express their
personal views, both in caucus and in the legislature.
If individual MLAs cannot reconcile their personal views
with the party, they can, under the current system, leave their
party and sit in the legislature as Independents.
However, In matters of confidence in the government on crucial
defined issues, such as budgets, the governing party must ensure
that its members are supportive of the official view. Without
such party discipline, a party becomes a mob
and no one benefits, least of all the voters, from a legislature
that has no apparent direction and
leadership.
Conclusion
I appreciate this opportunity to address the world's first
Citizens' Assembly on Electoral reform and, as a long time BC
resident, register my opinions on the various forms of
voting systems and governance that have been identified
in the CA website for consideration.
My apologies for the length of this submission but this issue is
probably the most important issue of our time in
BC. Itdeserves a full and detailed response from its
citizens, and cannot be summarized in two pages! The Assembly has
spent a considerable amount of time researching the options, so
also have I in considering the various options put before us.
I hope that my views are found to be useful in the
Assembly's future considerations and final
recommendation to our government.