The current impasse created in the aftermath of our provincial election (or should that be “after doing the math?”) reminded me of a presentation I made in 1991 at the Vancouver hearing of the (last Socred government’s) BC Electoral Boundaries Review Committee.
I (representing myself) suggested that BC introduce a “mixed member proportional” system of electoral districts, simply by creating an equal number of “riding members” and “list members” in the Provincial Legislature in Victoria. That would (say) mean cutting the province into 44 “ridings,” in which MLAs would be elected by a “first-past-the-post” plurality, while an equal number of 44 MLAs would be elected from sets of candidates on party-provided “lists.”
Every voter would then have two ballots: One to cast in favour of a candidate in his or her “riding,” while the other vote would be cast for a single candidate on the “lists.”
While half of the 88 MLAs would directly represent people in the 44 ridings (and these would of course be larger in population than the current ridings are), the other 44 MLAs would represent “parties.” In all other ways, the MLAs would be equal. In this way, every vote can and does count. Check out how this system actually works on the world wide web. (I did not say that last sentence in 1991, because there was then no world wide web.)
This was basically my analysis of the MMP electoral system, in use in (Western) Germany (a federal republic) since 1950, and as also proposed for New Zealand (a dominion with a single chamber legislature (no senate). I had studied the New Zealand proposals when I addressed the Committee. (This has since that time been in use in New Zealand for about 20 years, after two separate referenda were held.) In 1991, various Canadian books had already been written about the characteristics of MMP (as being the “best” proportional representation system in the world), and how this could possibly be adopted for use in federal elections in Canada. “Democracy, eh?” was one of those books. But until that day, nobody had suggested using “MMP” for provincial elections in provincial elections.
Professor Norm Ross of UVic, (as advisor to the Committee), commented favourably on what I said that day. But he added something like: “This is not the appropriate forum to bring up this issue.” Well, I thought that it was, because I had discussed electoral district boundaries. And one has to start somewhere in order to get the ball rolling. That day, various others talked a lot about moving boundaries in South Vancouver a few street blocks in a certain direction, as if moving a riding boundary from Granville Street to Oak Street was the end of the world. What a waste of money, I thought, and this is done once every five years?! And then, to confuse things even more, riding names are changed as well.
I did not reside in Canada about 12(?) years ago, when Mr. Nick Loenen’s crusade toward STV (the Single Transferrable Vote) happened. I was aware of that partially proportional system called the “Irish System” and was not supportive of it at the time, because MMP is basically a much more representative system, with a “proven track record” of political stability in Germany – just imagine, developed so soon after the “Weimar Republic” and the “Third Reich.” In recent years, voters in PEI, Ontario and BC voted in provincial referenda to change the electoral system, in all cases with a “too high” acceptance barrier – established by the “vested interests” – namely, the parties in power. Isn’t that also why our current prime minister has also reneged on his campaign promise? It is obvious that holding a second referendum in BC is unrealistic. Does this mean that we are never going to change? I hope not.
While it cannot be said that I would ever support the BC Green Party, and could perhaps rather be considered as a bit nearer to the other side of the political spectrum, I applaud the position taken by Mr. Weaver, that a serious change in our electoral system (namely toward proportional representation) is very long overdue in BC, and that it ought to be done without a referendum.
Are we entitled to have a “world class” electoral system? Would passing changes to the Electoral Act not be a marvellous present, (from BC to Canada), after 147 years of joining Confederation?
Jacob A. de Raadt, Osoyoos
