Vaughn Palmer, The Vancouver Sun

Most-asked question of citizens' assembly: Is this thing for real?

By Vaughn Palmer

The Vancouver Sun ,  24 September 2004

VICTORIA - One of the challenges for the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform is to persuade people that it is for real.

Ken Carty, the assembly's research director, tells of attending a conference of political scientists over the summer.

His fellow academics — Carty is on leave from the political science department of the University of B.C. — were keen to hear about the prospect of European-style electoral reform in a North American jurisdiction.

They were intrigued, too, at the innovative possibilities of an assembly of citizens, selected at random from the voters' list.

But his colleagues were taken aback when he got to explaining how the assembly was not an advisory body.

It had been empowered by the B.C. government to reach a decision on electoral reform on its own.

The assembly's judgment — Change the system? If so, how? — will be translated directly into a referendum for the voters to decide.

Carty says the reaction of many of his colleagues was "disbelief" of the "Ken, you must be pulling our legs" variety.

No options for political interference?

Politicians don't give out that kind of power to panels of citizens, especially over the electoral system.

Surely Carty knew that. It was in all the textbooks.

I heard a similar story from a member of the assembly.

She, like others on the assembly, has been putting in extra time, speaking to service clubs, chambers of commerce and the like about the importance of what they are doing.

While there is a lot of interest, she also hears from people who think she and the other members of the assembly must be "naive."

Don't they realize that the B.C. Liberals would never scrap the system that delivered their huge majority?

If the assembly ever recommended such a thing, it would itself be scrapped or put on the shelf, she's been told.

She's had to struggle to make people believe that the assembly, not the premier and his cabinet, will decide what (if anything) goes before the voters next spring.

Or consider my own experience.

On the weekend of Sept. 11-12,  I attended the opening of the assembly's decision-making phase.

After listening to the presentations and to the assembly members themselves, I reached the same conclusion as pretty much every other close observer of the assembly's deliberations.

The assembly has all but made up its mind to reject the current electoral system.

Nor does it much care if that also means the end of single-party majority governments.

The assembly, when it makes the final call as scheduled next month, is all but certain to recommend a new system.

Most likely the choice will be some variation on mixed-member proportional representation or the single transferable vote.

When I wrote as much in this space last week, the reaction from several government insiders was also one of disbelief.

They'd known this thing was in the works since the premier began pushing it when he was in Opposition. But somehow, they never quite believed it would come to this.

Was I sure it was curtains for the status quo? If so, couldn't the thing still be derailed at the referendum stage?

Well, yes, I am sure the assembly has it in for the first-past-the-post electoral system.

But that does still leave the referendum phase as the big unknown.

The government did impose a significant constraint on the assembly as regards the referendum.

The assembly, if it chooses to go against the current system, can recommend only one alternative.

It must explain it clearly, along with the implications.

And any recommendation will need the approval of 60 per cent of the voters in 60 per cent of the constituencies, meaning 48 of 79.

So the bar has been set high.

[Note from the Assembly: Unfortunately, the figures above aren't quite right. In fact, any recommendation will need the approval of 60 per cent of the voters as a whole, and a simple majority of 50% + 1 in 60 per cent of the constituencies.]  

But there's so much discontent with the current system of politics in this country that, if the assembly can reach a consensus on a plausible alternative, I expect it would probably carry the referendum.

By plausible, I mean a system that offers a good chance of broader representation in the legislature without sacrificing too much representation for the hinterlands.

That could be a tall order, if you listen to some of the all-or-nothing advocates of particular electoral systems.

The assembly resumes its deliberations this weekend. Some members have already turned their thoughts to the goal of coming up with a compromise that has the best chance of winning the referendum.

And that, in my estimation, makes it all the more likely that its advice will fly with the voters.

vpalmer@direct.ca

©Copyright 2004 The Vancouver Sun. Reproduced here with permission of The Vancouver Sun.