Click for Search Instructions |
||
Home > News & Events > CA Newsletter |
|
Newsletter - #1215th June, 2004 :
Vancouver (Internal)
Public hearings
The Assembly holds its 39th public hearing today.
This week, hearings take place in the Interior and on Salt Spring
Island. And next week they move to the Okanagan and the
East Kootenays. The 50th and final hearing will be held
in Kelowna on June 24th.
Following the hearings, the Assembly meets as a whole in Prince
George over the weekend of June 25-27. At this session,
members will discuss what they heard from British Columbians and
compare notes from the hearings. They will also review
the (by then) 700 or so submissions.
Another objective of this meeting is to come to agreement on how
the Assembly will conduct the deliberation phase this fall
– what process members will use to come to a decision
and formulate a recommendation.
The Assembly’s mandate requires it to issue a report
and recommendation to the people of BC by mid-December.
The following are excerpts from news releases summarizing the
last two weeks of hearings.
News release: June 5 Support widespread for mixed system With the devil certainly in the detail, dozens of British
Columbians told members of the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral
Reform their individual visions for how to improve BC's electoral
system.
Students and a number of younger presenters were among those
joining the chorus for change during hearings in Sechelt and
Abbotsford as well as in Surrey, Coquitlam, North Vancouver and
Whistler.
Five grade 11 and 12 students from Rockridge Secondary School,
West Vancouver, tackled the issue of voter alienation Wednesday
night in North Vancouver. Under their proposal for a mixed
electoral system, 50 per cent of seats in the Legislature would be
allocated to local representatives elected under a majority system
using a preferential ballot. The remaining seats would be chosen
using a proportional system.
At the same hearing, SFU student Tom Cornwall warmed to a
similar theme, suggesting that strict party control of MLAs made
voters feel "local representation is meaningless". Later in the
hearing, Chris Shaw added:
"What we really see with youth is that they are voting with
their feet; they are simply not going to the ballot box." And
in Whistler Thursday, Sara Jennings said more youth would vote
if they felt their vote would count and that "the result would
somehow resemble their views."
The need for BC's electoral system to reflect the diversity of
its population, while being simple and easy to understand, was also
discussed. In Surrey Monday night, James Proctor said each
registered voter should receive a "voter's guide" prior to an
election to help them select a party and the candidates.
Several speakers liked the idea of two ballots. In Sechelt,
Arnett Tuffs said votes for the party should be decided based upon
proportional representation, but said votes for local candidates
could be counted using the current first-past-the-post system. And
in Coquitlam, Drew Carmichael said that a mixed member proportional
system (MMP) would be the best choice for BC because it's simple,
would allow more representation for women and minorities, and would
make voters feel their votes counted.
Demand for MMP was widespread amongst presenters at every
hearing this week. MMP was given a twist in Whistler, where Doug
Morrison outlined his proposal for fractional voting –
where MLAs’ voting power is weighted according to the
size of their riding. He said it would allow citizens in ridings of
different population sizes to have the same voting power. In
Coquitlam, Stephen Broscoe felt MMP would work if the seats in the
legislature were increased to 100 from the current 79.
Consensual - rather than adversarial - government also scored
high marks. Assembly members were told not to fear coalition, or
minority government. Backing MMP, Alison Watt said in North
Vancouver: "We need more views in the Legislature to deal with
complex issues that are facing this province." And in Sechelt, Alun
Woolliams added: “A quick acting government that does
not act in the best interest of the majority is not an effective
government. Coalitions and governments with strong oppositions are
more likely to make more moderate and stable policy decisions with
a broader base of support.”
News release: June 12
British Columbians weigh in British Columbians once again this week demonstrated their
strong interest in and deep concern for the province’s
electoral and political systems.
Members of the Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral
Reform heard from residents of Vancouver Island, the Northwest and
the Lower Mainland. Many spoke passionately from their
personal experience and conviction, while others detailed the
intricacies of carefully-crafted electoral models based on many
hours of meticulous original research.
Recommendations literally covered the full gamut of electoral
system options – with the majority calling for
change. Many also expressed concerns and views that
went far beyond the realm of electoral systems – and
beyond the scope of the Assembly’s mandate.
Again, electoral models that incorporated some form of
proportionality dominated the recommendations. However,
there was remarkable variation in how that proportionality should
be achieved and how much proportionality was
desirable.
Based on her extensive research, Sylvia Korican recommended
retaining our current system with the addition of as few as 8 MLAs
selected to improve proportionality. Others suggested
10 or 16 proportional MLAs. Still other proponents of
the mixed member proportional (MMP) system suggested that up to
that 50 per cent of the legislature be composed of MLAs selected to
achieve proportionality. However, there
were many different thoughts on how these proportional MLAs should
be selected. Few supported a pure proportional
representation (PR) system.
A number of proponents of proportionality preferred the single
transferable vote (STV) system because it allows voters greater
choice by giving them the option of ranking candidates on the
ballot. It also reduces party control of
candidates. Several speakers detailed how STV has been
successfully used in Ireland.
In the North, some expressed support for proportionality
– as long as it did not mean an increase to the size of
the already vast northern ridings. Others, however,
argued that local representatives are irrelevant because they
cannot represent their ridings due to party
discipline.
Several offered cautions related to proportional
systems. Jason Clemens, of the Fraser Institute, warned
that proportional electoral systems “are far more
likely to be characterized by coalition and minority
governments” which, according to research, tend to
result in “larger government sectors characterized by
increased spending and increased
taxation.”
Speaking for the Vancouver Board of Trade, Dave Park also
cautioned that an electoral system with more than a relatively
small proportional component “would likely lead to
political and economic instability.”
Support for non-proportional models was also voiced. Several speakers defended the existing plurality (or first-past-the-post) system. Carol Hartwig cautioned the Assembly that electoral reform was not the answer to all BC’s political woes, nor was proportionality “a panacea for what ails us politically in this province.” Neil Sutherland outlined how adjusting the current system by incorporating multi-member ridings provided the benefits of proportionality without the drawbacks. Dave Flavell, David Godfrey and Arpal Dosanjh promoted the
alternative vote (AV) system – a majority system used
in BC in the 1952 and 1953 elections – which requires
candidates to win by a clear 50-per-cent majority in their
ridings. Others also supported use of the preferential
ballot – which allows ranking of candidates
– but in other types of electoral systems.
Michael Wheatley strongly advised the Assembly to select an
electoral model that British Columbians would embrace and endorse
should there be a referendum. “I would
rather you recommend a flawed system that is more likely to be
adopted than have you recommend an ideal system that has less
chance of being adopted.”
Vancouver City Councillor Sam Sullivan recommended that
citizens’ assemblies be constituted prior to every
election to rigorously review parties, candidates and platforms and
offer voters a considered opinion.
Making British Columbians’ views
heard
Presentation summaries are posted to the Assembly’s
website following each hearing. If you wish to present
at one of the few remaining hearings, you can sign up on our
website or call our office.
We now have over 600 submissions posted on our website and
another 100 or so being processed. You can add your
views by providing your submission via our website, e-mailing it to
us at submission@citizensassembly.bc.ca or mailing it to our
office.
|
© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform | Site powered by levelCMS | Site Map | Privacy Policy |