News release - Salt Spring hearing

Electoral change “devilishly difficult”

The Salt Spring Raging Grannies sang the praises of proportional representation Saturday afternoon at the Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform public hearing in Ganges.  While most presenters proposed systems incorporating some proportional elements, this view was not unanimous. 

Based on his broad political background, Ian McKinnon warned the Assembly that electoral change is “devilishly difficult” to implement.  He also cautioned them to carefully consider the implications of any change they might recommend on the behaviour of parties and the functioning of government.

McKinnon asked the Assembly to pay particular attention to two key aspects of party functioning when they analyze alternative electoral systems:
• The relative power between individual candidates and local party associations versus the central party organization
• The degree to which government formation and policy decision-making are seen to be the product of “back-room deals” rather than open processes

While he supported what he called “proportional representation light,” McKinnon cautioned that proportional systems tend to produce minority governments.  And minority governments tend to lead to ongoing back-room negotiations where small parties can hold disproportionate influence – a recipe for voter frustration.

Doug Dobson supported a mixed system where some candidates continue to be elected in local constituencies and others are elected from province-wide candidate lists to create proportionality between parties’ share of votes and their share of seats in the legislature.  These proportional – or “top-up” – MLAs would be selected from an “open list put forward by the party but prioritized by the voter”.

Jennifer Burgis, a federal political candidate, told the hearing that there’s “not a lot of democratic process inside political parties.”  Like Dobson, she recommended that the proportional candidates be elected from open lists where voters can select candidates, rather than closed lists where parties control the order in which candidates are elected. 

Singing “Proportional representation will give us a voice, and will give us a choice, and stop Old Boys from winning elections,” the Raging Grannies registered their support for a mixed system that combines proportionality with local representation.  This system was also supported by Andrew Lewis, who, like Burgis, is currently running for Parliament.

Sara MacIntyre, the BC director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, said the three goals of a changed electoral system should be to expand voter choice, ensure representatives are accountable to constituents, and provide a check on centralized power.  

The solution MacIntyre proposed was a mixed system made up of the multi-member single transferable vote system (a form of proportional representation) in urban areas and the single-member alternative vote system (a type of majority system which uses the preferential ballot) in rural areas. 

Carol Donnelly was the lone voice for a non-proportional system.  She recommended a type of majority system – where candidates are only elected if they receive a majority of votes.  To achieve this, Donnelly’s system required a second round of voting – a “run-off” election – with only the top candidates from the first round on the ballot.  Donnelly also voiced support for having seats reserved for women and minorities. 

Hearings continue next week in the Kootenays and the Okanagan – Cranbrook and Vernon on Monday, Radium and Revelstoke on Tuesday, Sparwood and Penticton on Wednesday, and Kelowna on Thursday.  A full schedule of public hearings is available on the Assembly’s website at www.citizensassembly.bc.ca.