Raise the Hammer
By: Ryan McGreal
Published: 2007/04/18 (Category: Politics)
The Ontario Government has announced that it intends to hold a referendum on switching Ontario's elections from the present first-past-the-post system to a system of proportionate representation (PR), where the share of seats a party has roughly matches its share of the popular vote.
I think some form of PR is the best way to go, since the present system allows a party to get a majority of seats - and carte blanche to ignore opposition for four or five years - with less than half the votes.
Coalitions of small parties that have to listen to each other tend to produce more pragmatic, less dogmatic (or cronyist) legislation than monolithic majority parties representing mere pluralities.
Further, it gives smaller parties a chance to win seats and actually represent their supporters.
Most importantly, perhaps, it allows electors to vote for the party they actually support rather than to vote "strategically" for the party they think has a chance of winning.
A referendum on PR in BC a couple of years ago won the support of 56 percent of voters, but the Campbell government had set the 'pass' threshold at 60 percent (ironically), so the will of the majority failed to become law.
Presently, the Ontario government plans to set the bar at 60 percent as well. It's incumbent on voters to insist that the government accept a straight majority in the referendum results.
With fair terms and a strong push from supporters, I don't see why a referendum in Ontario wouldn't pass.
Personally i'd prefer 75 STV seats and 50 PR seats instead of Several FPTP Seats and "Top-Up" seats as is proposed.
Just as long as they don't choose a 2-tier "mixed member" proportional system. As misrepresentative as our system is, at least it still enforces some kind of local representation. MMP systems create a class of MPs that are nominated by the party leader, and are voted in at large, effectively taking power away from ridings, and putting it into the party apparatus.
The BC proposed single transferrable vote system is infinitely better: Imagine you got to choose three representatives for your (larger) riding. Better yet, imagine you get to rank which candidates you'd most like to see elected, so if you really DON'T want a conservative representing Hamilton, you can rank everyone else first. I'd support that system in a heartbeat.
Crap, I should have read the article. They ARE proposing a mixed member system. What junk! I'd rather keep what we have.
NewsfeedsISSN: 1715-1554
Aerotropolis: Will It Fly? - Wednesday, December 3, 2008, at Mount Hope Community Hall, 3027 Homestead Dr., Mount Hope.
City Backs Down on Airport Development Size (Dec. 1, 2008) - Citizens at City Hall (CATCH) reports that the city has backed down on at least one aspect of its dispute with the province on the size of the Airport Economic Growth District (AEGD), a planned in
Same Old 'Traffic Trumps Everything' Thinking (Dec. 1, 2008) -
Apparently, the City Traffic department still doesn't get it.
After turning James and John into two-way streets that slowed traffic down, the city is now looking for ways to speed thing
Toronto Council to Vote on Corporate, Union Donations (Dec. 1, 2008) -
Toronto City Council has another opportunity today to decide whether to allow corporate and union donations to be proffered during municipal campaigns.
City Council has voted against such don
Poor and Dirty (Dec. 1, 2008) -
Your humble editor presents a modest tribute to the Hamilton Spectator report, "Poor and dirty", published November 27, 2008.
Poor and Dirty
They see us rollin'
On the highway
The
Double Downtown Density? We Should be Aiming to Quadruple It (Nov. 28, 2008) - Today's Spectator carries a head-scratching article on a proposal by Councillor Brian McHattie to double the downtown's urban density of 200 people and jobs per hectare to 400 people and j
Councillors Propose Salary Freeze (Nov. 28, 2008) - Councillors Chad Collins, Scott Duvall, Sam Merulla, Bernie Morelli and Terry Whitehead just issued a press release proposing a salary freeze for Councillors and non-union employees across the mun
By tomcooper
Posted 4/18/2007 4:15:07 PM
PR may indeed shake up the system - allowing groups that are tradionally dis-enfranchised to make inroads. For example, such a system would likely allow some representation from the Green Party which has been shut out of the first-past-the-post system.
One potential pitfall of PR deals with direct representation.
In theory our system is based on a Member of Parliament representing a specific geographic constituency. If you're a resident of Hamilton East, have a problem with a Worker's Compensation claim and aren't getting satisfaction from the Ministry - you can always go to your local Member for assistance.
While that system will still remain, there will be a seperate group of MPPs chosen at large who do not represent specific 'geographic areas'.
Since the Parties would provide lists of names for those individuals who would become elected if their Party received a high enough percentage of the vote, there is the possibility that the list could favour candidates from certain areas - like Toronto for instance. Other areas, like the North could get shut out.
It will be incumbent upon the Parties themsevles to ensure that the candidates chosen for the list is done so in a democratic way that is also regionally representative.
There will be much more to chew over the coming months on this issue.
It will be very interesting to see which interest groups come out in favour and who is opposed.
(Permalink)