There seems to be a growing attraction to the idea of some form
of proportional representation in our elected assemblies,
propelled, perhaps, by an instinct of wanting everything that we do
to seem to be “fair”, by a certain
frustration with the quality of government which we are getting
provincially and nationally, and by a misplaced notion, I believe,
that proportional representation leads to better and more effective
government.
It seems to me that, if one looks objectively, despite its
imperfections, the effectiveness of government in Britain, Canada
and the United States is as good as, or better than that of the
best run countries with proportional representation, and a whole
lot better than most of the rest. The warm fuzzy
feelings about good and sound decisions arising from a consensual
process just doesn’t materialize in the political
sphere. Good consensus comes from like-minded people
with common goals, objectives and philosophies, not the likes of
political opposites.
I think that many of the imperfections in our government are as
much, or more, the result of a poorly informed and improperly
motivated electorate, than with the “first past the
post” system. People voting on the basis of
poorly thought out pre-conceived notions for perceived short-term
gain. An informed electorate should be able to be
bombarded with political propaganda and have the ability to sort
out what makes sense. Of course this
doesn’t always happen, but that’s the
electorate’s problem, not the fault of the system.
The purpose of electing a government is to provide effective
management in public affairs and over public assets.
Good management does not result from a plethora of conflicting
groups, each with the power to thwart decision-making.
I feel that we are much better served by electing majority
governments who have a good chance of governing effectively and, if
we don’t like what they’re doing, then
voting them out the next time, than by having a series of
minorities which accomplish nothing. The purpose of an
election is to try to choose an effective government.
There are many forums and processes by which opinions can be made
known to legislators. Granting proportions of minority
opinions legislative power is not really a good way to get
effective government. An informed electorate also hears
these opinions and can decide whether the people who hold them
warrant legislative representation. Just because a
certain number of people hold certain views, doesn’t
mean they have the “right” to legislative
representation if most of their constituents do not wish it.
Another factor to do with proportional representation which
concerns me is that, through spending laws and other legalities,
particularly at the federal level, there seems to be a growing
trend in the concept that only political parties have a legitimate
place in the election process. This is a disturbing
trend. In proportional representation, it is the
political parties who will choose the candidates and the order in
which they will go to the legislature. This will exclude the
general public even more. I am against any further
control or influence by political parties in the election
process. At least under our current system, a candidate
for the legislature is subject to the direct vote of his or her
constituents.
While the idea of proportional representation may be intuitively
appealing, I submit that it does not lead to better or more
effective government (and often less effective), which is, after
all, the purpose of holding elections. The warm fuzzy
concepts of “fairness” and
“equality” should be applied to the
opportunity to participate in the election process, not to the
outcome. Proportional representation is not a good idea
for British Columbia and we should have nothing to do with it.
levelCMS