Submission KELLY-0564 (Online)
|
Submission By | David Kelly |
Address | Victoria, BC, Canada |
Organization | |
Date | 20040607 |
Category | Electoral system change |
Abstract
|
I support a degree of proportional representation [PR with
additional members] for the provincial electoral system
in BC because this would encourage a greater degree of consensus
building within the legislative process. [2 pages]
|
Submission Content
|
I support the introduction of a degree of proportional
representation [PR] into the provincial electoral system
in British Columbia, because I believe that this would encourage a
greater degree of consensus building within the legislative process
than currently occurs, and would help to damp down somewhat the
left-right swings which have been an unfortunate feature of recent
British Columbia political experience.
If the Assembly chooses to make a recommendation for change, I
suggest it follow a few guidelines:
-
Be minimal. Recommend the smallest change likely to
achieve your objective.
-
Keep it simple. The voting system must remain user
friendly.
-
Make it reversible. An Assembly recommendation
approved in a referendum may not work out as
anticipated. A built in back-out mechanism is
required.
-
Remember merchandising. Suggest to government a
mechanism for explaining and selling your recommendation to the BC
public prior to the referendum.
I am confident that the Assembly will produce a sensible
recommendation. The following suggestions may assist
its deliberations:
-
Retain the 79 first-past-the-post seats, which produce
MLA’s directly accountable to their
electorates. Add to it a number of seats which would be
distributed among the parties in proportion to their share of the
provincial vote total. Twenty-one proportional seats
would produce a Legislature of 100 members, without the likelihood
of an endless series of minority governments, but with the
certainty of a meaningful opposition. Alternatively,
reduce the 79 directly elected seats to 75, and add 25 proportional
seats for a Legislature composed in a 3 to 1 ratio of direct to
proportional members.
-
Keep the vote for the proportional members simple by providing
the voter with a ballot which asks only two questions:
“Which individual do you choose to directly represent
the constituency? Which party is your proportional
choice?” Leave to the parties the
construction of the party lists and priority ranking of
individuals. Do not confuse
voters by asking them to choose a proportional representative by
first choosing a party and then choosing a specific representative
from among lengthy lists of possible members. The
parties will ensure that their lists are balanced by region,
gender, ethnicity, background and so on.
-
Suggest that your recommendation, if adopted in the referendum,
be applied in two elections, and endorsed or rejected at a third
election. That is, following a referendum at the time
of the provincial election in 2005, and assuming a four year
election cycle, the recommendation would take effect in the
election of 2009, be continued in 2013, and be placed for
reconsideration in a referendum at the time of the election of 2017
(with any resulting change taking effect in 2021). This
would ensure that the electoral reform was in place for three full
electoral cycles, sufficient time for the political process to
fully adjust to the changed rules, and for the public to make a
measured determination of its appropriateness. Of
course, if the change produced short-lived minority government,
then the electoral cycles would be shorter, and the reconsideration
date would arrive faster, which might be appropriate in that
circumstance.
-
Consider how to sell your recommendation to the voting
public. A well thought out recommendation for change
placed for referendum will not necessarily win the necessary
support if it is not actively sold to the public. If
one of the major political parties campaigns against the
recommendation (because it went too far, or not far enough),
endorsement might be very difficult. How might the
Assembly organize support for its proposal? Could we
have a “Friends of the Assembly Society”,
organized on a constituency by constituency basis, supported by
interested volunteers able and willing to get out the
vote? How might this come about? Should the
provincial government provide funding to
“official” pro and con
organizations? Could the Assembly itself have a formal
role in explaining its recommendation to the public?
-
Consider restricting proportional members to a maximum of two
terms in the Legislature. I support introducing a
measure of proportionality into the Legislature. But
there is something unseemly about the prospect of creating an
opportunity for career politicians to sit in the Legislature
indefinitely because they hold a high priority place on their
party’s list, without ever having to face the voters
directly.
|