[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: All eyes on Ontario Will Ontario usher proportional representation into North America? Welcome to readers from south of the border. All eyes in the electoral reform movement are on Ontario, Canada which is set to vote on a referendum to change its voting system on October 10. Several multi-partisan citizens coalitions have pulled out all the stops to mount public awareness and advocacy campaigns for mixed member proportional representation - or MMP for short. Nor are the party old guards taking this lightly because their ability to manipulate the voting system to their benefit is threatened. Background Ontario has a parliamentary system. There is an elected legislature. October 10 is also the date of the general election. All 107 seats up for grabs. With the odd exception, Ontario has been a three-party province for over 70 years. In every election since 1937, no party has attained the support of 50% of the voters because of the winner-take-all, first past the post voting system - a system that is based on ridings (geographical districts). A party only requires a majority of ridings, not overall votes, to win 100% of the power. To win a district in a three way race, a candidate can be elected with as little as 34% of the vote. So while 55 or 60% of voters may vote against someone, that person wins and "represents" the entire riding. In reality, they vote the way their parties tell them to vote and only really represent the views of the people who voted for them. However, representatives, called Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs), do play a role in the community assisting people with a range of different issues and problems - many of them resulting from a lack of government response. But they hardly "represent everyone". Ontario is a very large and diverse province, sometimes called the economic engine of Canada with an incredible multi-cultural mix of peoples. There are 8.5 million voters of all stripes in every corner of the province although most people live in or around the large urban areas like Toronto and Ottawa. The Conservatives ruled Ontario for over 40 years when their streak was finally broken in 1985. Since then, all three parties have had their hands on the reigns of government, none ruling with a mandate from the majority - and none prepared to change the antiquated voting system. Ontario Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform Dalton McGuinty, leader of the Liberals, who promised in the 2003 election to not only review Ontario's voting system, but to use a "Citizens' Assembly" approach let voters study the matter, consult with the public, deliberate and if they recommended that it was time to make positive change, there would be a referendum held with the 2007 election. The Liberals won the election and he delivered on his promise albeit he has not made victory easy. The Citizens' Assembly did their work and wisely concluded that improving the system would be a good thing and that mixed member proportional would best suit Ontario's political culture. You can download their final report "One ballot, two votes" from their site. You can see a short . They deserve a lot of credit and thanks. They are the unsung heros of this campaign. This is Ontario's first referendum since a vote on prohibition in 1927. If successful, Ontario will be the first jurisdiction to have a form of proportional representation in North America for decades and break the stranglehold that the political parties maintain over the political process. MMP's benefits MMP will maintain geographic ridings but will also add a new element of representation by giving voters a party vote. Voters will have more choice at the ballot box as they will be able to split their vote. Like the party but not their candidate? Or vice-versa? Then vote for one party and a candidate from another party. Or vote for an independent and the party of your choice. Voters will elect representatives from ranked lists of pre-nominated party candidates to top up each party's share of seats so that it matches their popular vote. A party that receives 35% of the vote will get 35% of the seats - no more, no less. Smaller parties like the Greens will have an opportunity to represent their voters if they can reach 3% of the popular vote province-wide. Voters won't be faced with negative voting - where they vote for their second choice because they don't think their first choice can win and they want to ensure that their third choice is either turfed or not elected. You can see that is it a voting system designed by voters, for voters. MMP will not solve all of the social, economic and political problems facing Ontario - it is not a panacea - but it is an enabler because it allows for public policy making to reflect the majority will of the population. That provides a more stable basis from which to try and build and maintain the fragile social and physical infrastructure that helps define us as a caring society. It might allow for the decades long defensive stance to finally turn around and we can start talking about building things, not just about preventing things from falling apart. Reform opponents come out swinging If Ontarians can beat back the party bosses, operators, backroom hacks, lobbyists and corporate media barons, Ontario could become a beacon for other Canadian provinces and perhaps even American states, to push the electoral reform issue forward. A wasted vote is no vote at all. One central democratic measure of a society is that a person's vote matters - that their vote can affect and change things. With MMP, that will happen. And it scares the hell out of the vested interests who have grown comfortable finessing enough three way splits with 40% of the vote translates into 60% of the seats and 100% of the power. Opponents of reform have sought to sow confusion about MMP and to claim that this is all much ado about nothing. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Their proof? The public is not clamoring for a change to the electoral system. Yet the public is disgusted with "politics as usual" and are ready for change. So, they play to the suspicions people have of political parties and politicians and the fears they have of the unknown. They are a modern day Red Riding Hood warning of the big bad wolf. Any former politician or academic can now crawl out from beneath their slimy, padded rocks or tenury and become instant voting system experts with the media. Until a couple of months ago, it took veteran reformers months to get a single op-ed published. They've even adopted Republican style smear tactics labelling proponents of change as "losers" and "cry-babies" and attacking the integrity of the Citizens' Assembly and its members. Hurdles to jump & barriers to overcome So it's the classic David versus Goliath tale - the people versus the powers that be. Oh, I forgot to mention that the referendum has to carry by 60% in order to pass. In British Columbia, a similar referendum a couple of years ago garnered 57% of the vote (and failed but they'll have another chance in 2009). The public education campaign the Ontario government committed to has been wanting, having got off to a slow start. But for many voters, MMP is a no-brainer once they understand the basis concept - majority rule and equal votes that count no matter where you live or what you believe. The Vote for MMP campaign, where I have posted this story, is continuing to blitz communities around the province with literature, put up lawn signs and play radio ads. Other campaigns are also continuing their efforts. But in the end it will be up to one voter to tell another voter who will tell another voter why they should vote for MMP. If we accomplish that, we will surely succeed. Please browse around the website. Read about MMP. Have a look at the list of endorsers. Check out the learning materials and the blogs. If you want, you can even buy us a beer as long as you don't mark your contribution for advertising if you're from out of province.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: kiki (#0)
Sounds a little complicated, but why would anyone vote for a party different from their preferred candidate? It does seem like an improved version of a straight parlimentary system since candidates are also selected by voters, but that's about it. I like approval voting myself, where you vote for as many candidates on the ballot as you like. Every candidate totals up their votes and the highest votegetter wins. Much better than the vote for one system we have now.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||