Overhauling our electoral process
The average British Columbian is now painfully aware of how the
quality of our electoral system can directly influence the years in
between elections.
At a time when British Columbians are turning out in fewer
numbers for their elections, the B.C. Liberal overnment has
initiated the Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform. This public
consultation process will, if implemented, essentially revamp our
aging electoral process in favour of one that more accurately
reflects how people vote.
There may not be too many highlights in the B.C. Liberals' first
term as government. The Citizens Assembly on Electoral
Reform, however, is the one progressive reform that very few people
are voicing their opposition to. The average British Columbian is
now painfully aware of how the quality of our electoral system can
directly influence the years in between elections. There is no
greater argument for electoral reform than the results of the last
B.C. election.
The Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform has come about in the
midst of an otherwise horrendous first term as government. The
Liberal inspiration for the Citizens Assembly is subject to debate.
One clear example was the 1996 B.C. election. Despite winning the
most votes in that election, the B.C. Liberals lost to the NDP. The
NDP won more seats, with fewer people actually voting for them, and
therefore won the election.
If the NDP had had the foresight to implement some form of
proportional representation in their 10 years as the government, we
would have a better form of government in Victoria today.
Instead, we have a disproportionate circus show that revolves
around one Liberal telling the other Liberals how great they all
are. The more serious consequence of the NDP's lack of vision is
that we see legislation being passed that we know nothing about. If
the NDP had put some of their electoral reform research into
practice, we could have seen the following scenario:
In the 2001 provincial election the Liberals claimed 58 per cent
(917,000) of the total vote, the NDP received 21 per cent (343,000)
and the Green party received 12.4 per cent (198,000) of the votes
cast. Yet in the legislature we saw 98 per cent of the seats
occupied by Liberals, 2 per cent by the NDP and no seats held by
the Green party.
In 2001, given the proportion of voting preferences, the
Liberals would have ended up with 45 seats, the NDP would have had
16 seats and the Green party would have ended up with 10 seats. A
far different picture from what we have now. If this is not an
example of how our voting system needs an upgrade, I don't know
what is.
Our existing electoral system, commonly known as first past the
post (FPTP), found its origins in the British parliamentary system
150 years ago. Back then, there was a two party domination, which
still exists today. Therein lie the limitations of FPTP - it
maintains the status quo of the two party system. Any new party
that is not a mere duplication of the existing two will find
obtaining elected representatives very difficult, if not
impossible. There is no better example of this than in B. C., where
the Liberals essentially duplicated the political void left by the
Social Credit party in opposition to the left-leaning New
Democrats.
Amazingly and somewhat suspiciously, there has been little
opposition to the Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform. The
provincial government has dedicated $5 million to its completion
and the Vancouver Sun has dedicated a considerable amount of copy
to covering the process. We have yet to see a definitive statement
from the union movement on the process. The large corporations and
business sector have been quiet on the issue.
It is generally agreed the electoral process in British Columbia
is in need of change, so what do we change it to? Our first
indication of the need for change came about around Adriane Carr's
citizen's initiative on proportional representation. This low
budget campaign had 4,000 volunteers eventually collecting 98,000
signatures. While the campaign fell short of the needed number of
signatures, it did show anyone with the slightest interest that the
citizens of British Columbia were/are interested in reforming their
electoral system.
The system that seems most suited to our needs is one used in
New Zealand. New Zealand's form of mixed member proportional
representation takes the existing first-past-the-post process and
adds a second ballot that uses proportional representation. Why New
Zealand? New Zealand has a similar socio-economic and geographical
profile to British Columbia. It has a vocal native population,
similar proportions of urban and rural populations and political
parties spread throughout the political spectrum.
New Zealand's adoption of the mixed member proportional
representation only arrived after a number of years of royal
commissions, referenda and a decidedly nasty anti-democracy
campaign by the Kiwi business elite to the tune of $1 million in
the week prior to there final referendum.
Upon implementation, New Zealanders found that voter turn-out
increased, the gender imbalance was reduced significantly, more
native candidates ran (and were elected) and while not all the ills
of government were reduced, the population of New Zealand elected a
profile of candidates that more accurately represented them.
That being said, New Zealand still suffers from political
scandal and political fear-mongering. Governments can still
theoretically win with large majorities, although post-election
coalitions seem to be the rule of thumb. Even this varies from one
issue to the next. Noticeably reduced is that vicious
ideological swing from left to
right and back again that has plagued British Columbia for the last
20 years.
Can British Columbians follow the example set by New Zealand
(and 60 other nations) and make the leap to proportional
representation ?
The most significant barrier to us adopting a new electoral
system is too many choices. I fear that if the Assembly cannot
decide on one particular process it will throw up its hands and
leave things the way they are, which would be a big mistake, not to
mention a waste of personal time and $5 million. It is therefore
important for those who feel strongly about the issue to speak out
at the various public forums being held around the Province.
Starting in May 2004, these open meetings will be an excellent
opportunity for the rest of us to speak on the issue of electoral
reform.
My perfect scenario for the 2009 election is to see the first
implementation of B.C.'s version of mixed member proportional
representation. We would see more women, more visible minorities
and a far healthier legislature in Victoria. After that election we
would see parties working in coalitions to resolve differences.
However,
the most important factors would be that B.C. voters would feel
like they were voting for something as opposed to voting against
something. Imagine not one vote going to waste.
Between now and 2009, we have to ensure that mixed member
proportional representation is the voting method of choice decided
on by the citizens assembly and we get the voters in 2005 to vote
in favour of implementing mixed member proportional representation
in 2009. Once we have this in place, we can then decide the future
of this province in a far more fair and equitable manner.
Ian Gregson is the vice-president of CUPE 3338 and was a
volunteer with the 2002 proportional representation initiative on
electoral reform.
levelCMS