Submission WHITTLES-1597 (Online)

There are three essentials required to end the undemocratic system that has evolved in BC: fixed election dates; a system of proportional representation using MMP; and a leadership vote (directly or indirectly). [2 pages]

I think that there are three essentials required to end the undemocratic system as has presently evolved in BC (and Canada):

1.  Fixed Election Dates

Some parties (notably the Federal Liberals) want flexible timing to manipulate their control over elections by juggling the timing of an election to provide themselves with a major built-in advantage over the non-incumbent or the smaller parties. This is definitely not a level playing field!

This feature also allows a party member (MP or MLA) to vote against his own party if legislation is proposed that goes against election promises, or the party's principles.

In BC we currently have a fixed election date, and it is essential that this feature be kept in a revised system.

2.  Proportional Representation

It seems this would be the best way in which the average citizen could feel that their vote is worth casting. I myself am at the point of not bothering to vote, since the results are ALWAYS undemocratic.

The current system is very much like a dictatorship where the opposition, the general public, or even the governing party's own MLA's, have no way of influencing legislation or policies which a determined leader wants, which then become the laws.

Even though I supported the current BC government, how can any country call itself a democracy when winning 58% of the votes gains 97% of the seats in power? Although I disagree with the policies of the small parties such as the Green Party, they may represent a significant percentage of the population, and yet have no hope of gaining ANY representation with the current 'first-past-the-post' system. It is a tribute to those voters who continue to vote for the smaller parties even though their votes are in truth thrown away, never to be heard of again, after they are counted and reported.

One objection that one hears about the MMP system, is that the parties will appoint many of the candidates who become MLA's. This is really no different from the current system as it is developing in our (undemocratic) Canada now. Each party's list of selected candidates would be available and subject to a person's judgment during an election, and the overall quality of ALL their candidates, and their LEADERS would be an issue in an election.

A further very serious threat to our democratic representation would also be muted, the growing tendency of certain groups to stuff the candidate selection meetings at the last moment to get their candidate elected to represent the party in an upcoming election. It would be in the interests of a party to not allow last minute signups because their list of candidates would be (or should be) subject to public scrutiny as part of the election. How the parties selected their candidates, and the overall quality of ALL their candidates would be an issue in an election.

Another objection one hears about the MMP system is that legislation is delayed or scrapped because a majority of the groups can't agree. This is as it should be; at present, parties with less that 50% get a majority government and ram through their agendas (often quite different from their election promises).

The Federal Liberals got 60% of the seats with 40% of the vote, which was only 60% of the eligible voters. In effect, that is a majority government with 24% of the eligible voters, set up by manipulating the size and locations of the ridings. No wonder people are not bothering to vote! An MMP system might greatly increase the % of eligible voters who do vote, particularly amongst the younger voter population.

3.  Leadership Vote

I would also prefer to have the right to vote for the Premier directly, because this is a very powerful position in most governing systems; however, I recognize that this is difficult in a system without an executive.

Many people claim to vote mainly for the local candidate, a position I find rather amazing, given the almost total lack of input from even the members (MLA's or MP's) of the governing party, if a leader is determined to exclude them.

At least with an MMP system you would be at least indirectly voting for the premier, as you are casting a vote to determine the level of power a party ends up with (e.g., the number of seats and therefore the amount of influence the leader has).

If the ballot had the party's name and the leader's name, in addition to the name of the local candidate, one would be considering the leader as well as the local candidate, as one cast their vote.

I would like to finish by expressing my appreciation for the time and effort of the members of the Citizen's Assembly.