Contact UsSearch
Click for Search Instructions
Home > Get Involved

Submission DREGER-0593 (Online)

Submission ByMr Henry Dreger
AddressTerrace, BC, Canada
Organization
Date20040609
CategoryElectoral system change
Abstract
BC should adopt an MMP electoral system where half to two thirds of our MLAs are elected from single member ridings, and the remainder from a party list. Voters would have two votes; one for the local member, one for the party list. [3 pages]

Submission Content
 

Introduction 

My name is Henry Dreger.  I am a retired high school teacher.  I do not represent anyone but myself.  Furthermore, I am not a member of a political party nor have I ever been in, or run for, political office.

The Proposition

I recommend that British Columbia adopt a Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) electoral system where half to two thirds of our MLA s are elected in single member ridings on a plurality basis, and the other one third to one half are elected from a political party list. Voters would have two votes; one for the local member, one for the party list.

Background

I approached the issue of electoral reform by, first of all, reflecting on what is wrong or needs fixing or updating in our present single riding plurality system.  From my observations over the years, I have concluded that our present system is:

  • Divisive; often causing antagonistic feelings among neighbours and in the community.
  • Undemocratic; for example, in the sense that it is possible for a party receiving 10-20 % of the popular vote to end up with little or no representation in the Legislature.
  • Discourages voter participation; as seen in the decreasing voter participation. This reflects disillusionment and frustration among the electorate and is reflected in the comment “my vote does not matter anyways”.
  • Exclusive; it encourages a “we win you lose” attitude.
  • Unrepresentative; of the diversity of the electorate. It does not reflect well the cultural, ethnic, or gender make up of the people.
  • Limiting; it restricts our choices by discouraging minor or fringe parties.
  • Producing lop-sided results; strong (but not necessarily good) government and weak oppositiont; recent examples in BC, Alberta and New Brunswick.
     
Benefits of a Mixed Member Proportional System
 
I see the following advantages or improvements in my proposed Mixed Member Proportional System:

  1. Less division or anger among the electorate.  The vast majority of voters will    see their views and opinions represented in the Legislature.
  2. More democratic.  It is much less likely that a party with a minority of the votes could end up with more seats than the party receiving more votes.  Nor would a party receiving, let’s say, 38-40% of the votes receive a majority of the seats in the Legislature.
  3. Greater voter participation.  This is likely to happen because of the feeling that “my vote is going to count”.  A further benefit should be a greater participation in  political party life (one incentive might be to get themselves on the party list for election). This greater interest and involvement should result in a more informed electorate.
  4. A greater acceptance of and identity with the electoral representation and political process.  The party list would also be an ideal vehicle to create a better gender balance and allow the bringing in of representation from underrepresented minority groups, including the handicapped.
  5. Increase in our electoral choices (i.e. larger number of parties), which again should encourage a greater voter participation.
  6. Fairer and more effective government.  There will be much less likelihood of lop-sided parliaments as we have seen them recently in BC, Alberta and New Brunswick.  A strong opposition is a healthy situation in democracies.
  7. Conducive to greater co-operation and consensus building attitudes among politicians and parties.  When you need or depend on other groups or parties in a formal or informal coalition, there will be less likelihood or temptation to ridicule or demonize the other politicians or parties.
Additional Factors to Consider 

Whatever system is chosen, it must always be possible for ordinary people to run as independent candidates.  So I would encourage you to rule out a full proportional representation system. In a PR model there should be a reasonable bar or hurdle (e.g. in the neighbourhood of 5%-7%) to prevent an unwieldy number of parties.
A run-off system, or two stage system, of voting should be avoided as it could easily lead to voter fatigue.
The Preferential Ballot system would be my second choice.  It addresses some, but not all, of the concerns expressed in my background. 

Conclusion

I am fully aware that my proposed Mixed Member Proportional System of voting is not a perfect system of electoral democracy.  It is a system, however, that has been effectively used by countries and regions like Germany, New Zealand and Scotland.  It is a system which, in my opinion, is far more democratic and representative of voters and their wishes than the present single member riding plurality system (first past the post system).

Whatever the final outcome, I encourage the Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform to recommend a system that includes at least an element of proportionality to our electoral system, a system that encourages greater involvement by the electorate and a system which gives people a greater sense that they have been heard.

© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral ReformSite powered by levelCMSSite Map | Privacy Policy