Click for Search Instructions |
||
Home > News & Events |
|
News release - Cranbrook public hearing21st June, 2004 :
Vancouver (Internal)
Go slow Assembly told
A variety of viewpoints and concerns were discussed at a public
hearing in Cranbrook Monday evening. Members of the
Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform heard pleas for
more proportionality, stronger constituency representation for
rural areas, and a ballot that allows voters to rank their
preferences.
A note of caution was sounded by William Hills, of
Cranbrook. Although a long-time proponent of
proportional representation, he urged the Assembly to
“go slow”. His concern was the
lack of openness and democratic process within political parties
and in the selection of candidates.
Hills told the hearing that you have to be 18 to vote in an
election, but only 14 to elect a candidate; you must be a Canadian
citizen to vote, but not to elect a candidate; you have to reside
in the riding to vote, but not to elect a candidate.
“Simply put, I do not want 14-year-olds and
… non-citizens … to participate in any
party’s selection of who will sit in the
legislature.”
“Political parties today are far too
powerful,” Hills said. “Parties and their
activities simply must be put under laws and government regulation;
otherwise, proportional representation simply transfers more power
over government to private parties.”
William Latter, Lloyd Hodge and Carol Patton were more confidant
that injecting proportional representation into the electoral
system would provided greater fairness and needed
change. “It’s pretty clear
it’s time for a change,” stated
Hodge. “A vote is the ultimate expression
in a democracy,” added Latter.
“Please, please do not end the Assembly without a
recommendation for an equitable voting system such as mixed member
proportional representation.”
Vine Matter, provided the Assembly with a written statement that
also supported increased proportionality.
“It may not be perfect, it may be slightly more
complicated, but the end result is a better reflection of the views
of voters,” she wrote.
Alan Burt and Wilf Hanni advocated a different
approach. Both suggested the preferential ballot
– which allows voters to rank candidates –
and a majority electoral system that requires candidates to achieve
over 50 per cent of voter support to win a riding.
Burt, like Hills, focused primarily on the increased power given
parties in a proportional system. “I
believe that proportional representation will further solidify the
power of the party machine and further weaken the voice of the
people thereby increasing the democratic deficit.”
Hanni, however, was concerned about voters casting ballots for
their second choice under the current system because they feel
their preferred candidate – often from a smaller party
– has no chance of winning.
“The preferential balloting system of voting would
eliminate this problem entirely.”
Stephen Garvey, of Kimberley, challenged the legitimacy of the
Assembly. He said the Assembly was undemocratic because
its mandate was dictated by the legislature and is too narrow in
scope. “Democracy is not fundamentally
electoral,” he stated, “it’s
what the people want.”
|
© 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform | Site powered by levelCMS | Site Map | Privacy Policy |