Contact UsSearch
Click for Search Instructions
Home > News & Events

Rafe Mair editorial on AM600

26th October, 2004 : Vancouver (Internal)
Improvement on what we now have


Broadcast on CKBD AM600, 26 October 2004 and posted on Rafe Online

First of all, I congratulate the members of the Electoral Reform Commission and their Chair, Jack Blaney and the creator of the mandate, Gordon Gibson.

All British Columbians ought to be grateful that 160 of their fellow citizens took the time and made the effort to deliberate on a matter that has troubled us for many a year. They didn’t fall into the trap of making the perfect enemy of improvement and while I, like many others, might have wanted a different result that’s a hell of a long way from saying they have reached the wrong conclusion.

For the Commission to have succeeded, it only had to recommend an improvement on what we now have, not a very high threshold. It has, in my opinion, gone much further and if their recommendations are accepted by the voters, we will have a much improved, not to say perfect, democracy.

I support the decision and will devote energy and time to helping the "yes" side. This doesn’t mean that the "no" side will not get time to make their case because they will. But I must remind people that I am not a journalist and never have pretended to be unless being an editorialist qualifies. As with other issues I have felt strongly about, I will stake out my position.

Let’s first deal with the argument that it is too complicated. This is nonsense. In a three MLA riding there might be 20 candidates … maybe a few more. But even if it’s twice that many, to say that the ballot will be too complicated is a silly argument.

Take a class of Grade I students, give them a piece of paper with 25 goodies, ice cream, chocolate bars and what have you … and ask them to list their top five. Of course they would handle that easily. It wouldn’t matter how many choices you offered them these kids would tick off their favourites.

Are we to believe that if a person goes to a newsstand to seek a copy of Playboy, Time and Newsweek, and the magazine stand has 25, 50, or even 100 other magazines, that our buyer will walk away having been unable to sort out 3 of the number there?

Those who complain, when you think about it, are arrogantly proclaiming that smart people like themselves could handle the new ballot but the stupid, great unwashed of the province are too dull.

The argument is as shallow as the one that says there should be a limitation on the number of people who can run for Mayor of Vancouver because the ballot is now so confusing that the public can’t understand it. When the day comes that we accidentally elect Batman or Mr. Peanut as Mayor, I will think about it again but until then I suggest that we all assume that most people can understand a ballot with a lot of names on it and those who can’t, likely wouldn’t understand one with only three names.

The argument would better be framed, do you want some diminution of the power of the Party, hence the party leader? Are you afraid of a Legislature where there is no majority and governments must constantly face the entire legislature in making their decisions?

Do you think it might be a good idea to make it easier for small parties, indeed even independents, to be elected to the Legislature? Shouldn’t the government have to ask the House for money and demonstrate their case, not demand it by right of the might of their majority? Those are some of the real questions

There will be some who like the present system. They like the certainty of majority government and would rather have the warts that accompany it than the shortcomings of minority government.

That’s a decent argument and will, no doubt be made in the months to come. I hope you will be persuaded that minority government or coalition governments do not mean weak government unless weak is a synonym for consultation. For this is what will happen. Be it a coalition or simply a minority government the individuals will be stronger and the parties weaker. In fact the principal argument I would make against any form of PR is that because there is a party list which you must be on to get elected, MLAs would be all the more compelled to vote the party line.

If the issue is whether or not the recommendation is an improvement on what we have my answer is a resounding Yes. If the question is whether or not it is perfect, it is an equally resounding no.

But surely interest in provincial government affairs will heighten considerably when everyone knows that small parties and even individuals known for public service can be elected too. Moreover, having grasped the nettle this once, there won’t be the same hesitation in the future to talk about other reforms. For this is where, if the referendum passes, BC will differ from Canada as a whole – we know that on the federal scene, with all the vetoes, reform is impossible … yet our own experience will teach us that reform in BC is very possible indeed.

There is much to talk about it and for the next 7 months, we will be doing that right here.

[© Copyright 20004 Rafe Mair and Rafe Online. Reproduced here by permission of Rafe Mair.]
© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral ReformSite powered by levelCMSSite Map | Privacy Policy