Electoral Reform Referendum

How will you vote?

  • I am in favour

    Votes: 30 34.5%
  • I am against it

    Votes: 56 64.4%
  • I don't plan to vote

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • Total voters
    87

fish brain

Crew Member
The mail in ballots for the referendum are being mailed out across the province with a return deadline of November 30.
Let's get some discussion on how people feel about changing the way we vote in BC.
Please be respectful of other peoples right to their opinions, even if you feel strongly that they are wrong. Let's keep this to discussion and education, not I am right, you are wrong and therefor stupid.
 
I am against the reform. While first past the post is not perfect, it results in much more stable governments. The majority of the time it avoids the coalitions needed to form governments, and usually avoids the situation of the non top vote getting party taking power. Of course this did not work in the last BC election and resulted in a coalition taking over from the top vote getting party. Under proportional representation this will become the norm, not the exception. The main flaw of proportional representation is it gives outsized power to small "kingmaker" parties who are needed to form the coalitions. In Europe it has meant outsized influence of far left parties, while in Israel it has resulted in the same for far right parties. In BC the NDP and Greens want it as they see it as a way to rule the province in perpetuity.
 
I am against the reform. While first past the post is not perfect, it results in much more stable governments. The majority of the time it avoids the coalitions needed to form governments, and usually avoids the situation of the non top vote getting party taking power. Of course this did not work in the last BC election and resulted in a coalition taking over from the top vote getting party. Under proportional representation this will become the norm, not the exception. The main flaw of proportional representation is it gives outsized power to small "kingmaker" parties who are needed to form the coalitions. In Europe it has meant outsized influence of far left parties, while in Israel it has resulted in the same for far right parties. In BC the NDP and Greens want it as they see it as a way to rule the province in perpetuity.

Bingo! Traditionally PR favored the left or centrist parties. Depending on the system, If it is one where you rank the parties that it really favors centrist parties.

However, as you correctly pointed out PR is now giving rise to far right wing parties in Europe.
 
I think the changes being proposed will increase the power of political parties.
That is not good in my books.

And the nail in the coffin is that we are to 'trust' our government to implement the peoples' decision to change.
So, no, sorry government, you can't navigate yourself out of a wet paper bag efficiently, much less fundamentally change how governments are elected.
 
I agree with the sentiments above.....add to that, Horgan and his band of twits sure didn't make it easy for people to understand. Sure a quick Google will give you plenty of info but I bet the vote percentage is going to be LOW.
 
Max Cameron, a political scientist at U.B.C., believes pro-rep provides a government that is more representative of the voters. What proportional representation does is dilute the power of a mass party. A party no longer gets 100% of the power with only 40% of the vote.

In B.C., the biggest beneficiary of PR would likely be the Green party, which Cameron said could grow at the expense of both the NDP and Liberals.
“It would probably mean going from a two- to three-party system,” he said.

Ultimately, for those concerned about the stability of government policies, PR might be better than FPTP, Cameron said.

Despite recent uncertainty in Germany, the country has generally had stable governments and a very strong economy because of its coalitions, not despite them. The same is true in many other countries with pro-rep like Belgium, Netherlands and Sweden.

“It’s the stability of their coalitions which gives the kind of permanence to their policies,” Cameron said. “One of the critical things governments have to do is govern for the long haul. They can’t just keep governing for the next four years."

What you get with our present majoritarian system is this lurching back and forth – Liberal, NDP, Liberal, NDP. Although, in reality, in our province, it’s primarily Socred/Liberal, with the NDP occasionally coming in and then reversing policies the Liberals have done, and Liberals coming back and reversing NDP policy. In terms of policy and the economy, FPTP is actually unstable. Pro-rep is stable and definitely a more fair representation of the voter's wishes.
 
I agree with the sentiments above.....add to that, Horgan and his band of twits sure didn't make it easy for people to understand. Sure a quick Google will give you plenty of info but I bet the vote percentage is going to be LOW.
It could be better but anyone with a driver's licence should be able to figure out this voting process.
 
It will be interesting to see where this poll goes considering their is a lot of people on here from Vancouver island who almost always vote for NDP and have the biggest strong hold of green voters.
 
It will be interesting to see where this poll goes considering their is a lot of people on here from Vancouver island who almost always vote for NDP and have the biggest strong hold of green voters.

LOL! Generalize much??

Both myself and the vast majority of my Buddies who live on The Rock will be voting against this travesty.
A few touched on the reasons above, and there are more. Many more.
BC will become a running joke and even more politically twisted than it is under the proposed PR regime.
Not on our watch it won't!

Also note that not everyone on The Rock votes NDP. Really.
Some have actually graduated beyond voting for their grandfather's party which has done very very little for them since the days of their grandfathers.

Cheers,
Nog
 
I think that it id fair to say that what wildmanyeah says is indeed a generalization, but he has derived it from the political leaning of the voters on Vancouver Island, who demonstrated their views at the ballot box during the last provincial and federal election. A generalization seems appropriate in this instance.
 
Explainer.
 
Economist and Order of Canada recipient Dr. Rosly Kunin says of MMP List MLAs: "Those chosen aren’t tied to any riding or any specific electorate. They didn’t have to knock on doors, show up at all-candidates meetings or take any measures to make themselves or their ideas known to voters. How much time are they likely to spend listening to and dealing with citizens’ problems?"

https://troymedia.com/2018/10/03/proportional-representation-pr-loser-game/

I’m reminded of the most terrifying words in the English language: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Blind trust on something as important and complicated as electoral reform is enough. Couple that with what you hear all over the province that this is about ensuring retention of power by the current government and it’s an Olympic long jump.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op...form-process-is-too-controlled-by-politicians

In practice, proportional representation creates great difficulty carrying out the responsibilities that come with governing. That’s because it tends to create unstable coalition governments, encourages small, single-issue or even extremist parties and uses lists of party backroom types who become MLAs based on a party’s percentage of the provincial vote.

Proportional representation would create a new kind of politician with no responsibility or accountability to any constituents but only to the political party that appointed him or her.


https://theprovince.com/opinion/op-...ion-may-be-good-for-ndp-but-its-wrong-for-b-c

There is nothing more fundamental to democracy than free elections and the rules by which our legislative representatives are chosen. Changing this system is a serious undertaking – one that demands meaningful public engagement, clear alternatives that people can easily understand and a voting process that ensures the collective voice of British Columbians is heard.

The upcoming provincial referendum on electoral reform falls short of meeting these basic criteria.


..................

Apart from the flawed design of the referendum question, there are other reasons to worry about the implications of shifting to a PR-based electoral system. For one thing, experience in other countries suggests it is likely to encourage political fragmentation, with several more parties virtually certain to secure representation in the legislature. This will make majority governments a thing of the past and lead to greater political and policy instability – something that could well have a dampening effect on capital formation, business confidence and incentives for long-term entrepreneurial wealth creation. Over time, PR may also inject more extremist sentiments into our politics, as seen in several European countries with PR systems where neo-fascist, anti-immigrant and communist/hard-left parties often have a place in national parliaments.

https://biv.com/article/2018/10/bcs-electoral-reform-referendum-seriously-flawed-initiative

We are lurching, wobbling, staggering, somewhat blindly and quite deafly, into the fog of conscious confusion and – to be uncharitable, if I may – deliberate under-information that calls itself the 2018 Referendum on Electoral Reform.

Sadly, cynically, it is not textbook political reform as much as it is playbook NDP-Green politics. This isn’t an enlightened political class seeking a wiser way but an expedient stunt to keep the Andrew Weaver Trio from pulling out of the NDP Ensemble. On the basis of current standings and polls, it appears to perpetuate the status quo of a left-of-centre coalition.

I see mainly negatives.

It will create supersized ridings that will lose even more connection with communities.

It will confer power on people not directly elected but appointed by their parties, who might not live in and thus understand ridings they purportedly represent.

It will create more expensive government as coalitions are built upon pet issues and projects that must be economically pieced and held together.

It will engender regular post-election periods of political stasis as these coalitions are assembled to then generate legislation.

It will permit the populous Lower Mainland to essentially determine the composition of the provincial legislature.


https://biv.com/article/2018/10/referendum-electoral-reform-bound-end-badly-bc
 
There has been plenty of talk about why our first-past-the-post system needs to be changed, but not much talk about why proportional representation may not be the way to go.

Here are seven things to consider:

1. We need broad-based parties. One Issue Parties are not what running a government is all about.


Good Government needs "Big Tent Parties," not single-issue parties. Governing B.C. is about running a health care system, an education system, social assistance, parks, environmental assessments, a highways system, and much, much more. Parties need policies on all of these areas to be credible and offer voters a full picture of what you will do. They should also span a broader range of ideas to bring diverse views to the table and create good policies for all British Columbians. Hopefully, voters think about the big picture as well and consider a balance of policies before deciding who to hand power to for four years.

In today's world of increasingly fragmented news sources, social media silos, and "tribe building" it is all too easy for a group to focus on only one issue, build a "tribe" around one narrow set of policies — immigration, reducing taxes, regional representation (There is still a Vancouver Island Party) and aim to get five per cent of vote, thus guaranteeing them enough seats to potentially broker a deal to make their narrow agenda part of the government agenda.

For years, the Green Party languished in the low single digits as a one issue party until more recently when they have been able to put together a broader platform.

It may not be ideal that a party with 40 per cent of the vote gets 100 per cent of the power, but it is better than an extreme party with 5 to 10 per cent of the vote getting some of the power and being at the table to push their narrow agenda.

2. All MLAs should be elected by the people, not their parties


Although the "details" are yet to be worked out, according to the B.C.government's PR website, one of the likely features of the proposed proportional representation systems is "party lists." These selected people would be more accountable to their party than to voters.

Political parties would choose directly some of the members of the legislature. These appointees could potentially be cabinet ministers, and potentially a party leader — as is the current deputy leader of New Zealand. If someone cannot get a plurality of voters in some jurisdiction to vote for them, even if it is Kelowna-West, they should not be in the position of making laws. If they make unpopular decisions, no one can directly vote them out. Their party can re-appoint them after the next election.

3. Your riding will definitely be a whole lot bigger.

One thing that is certain under any of the proposed proportional representation systems is that your local riding or voting area will get a whole lot bigger — probably about twice the size. For Squamish, this likely means taking in West Vancouver as ridings tend to spread out from denser urban areas into rural areas. Or we could have a huge riding that covers the Sunshine Coast and some Gulf Islands.

This means your MLA will represent a lot more people and more communities and have a lot less time for Squamish, and Squamish concerns. Don't expect an appointed "Party List" politician to really care about local issues when his or her power and influence come from the party.

4. When politicians meet behind closed doors to make deals for power, the taxpayer loses.

When political parties negotiate for power, they put the things they want on the table, and they will inevitably cost taxpayers more money. When pollical parties have to choose between power and taxpayers, they tend to choose power. A Fraser Institute study recently bore this out. Yes, you should be skeptical of what the Fraser Institute publishes, but this study was just a look at widely available statistics on the size of government. Hopefully, most will agree that keeping taxes reasonable and deficits low is one thing that governments should consider.

5. We know who to hold accountable.

The good thing — perhaps one of the most important things — about the first past the post system is that when a lot of voters feel the government in power is past its best before date, it is easy to make sure they do not run the government anymore. However, under PR, a party that has plunged in popularity could still be part of the negotiations and even leverage an agreement into cabinet seats or continue to push their agenda forward with only a small percentage of the vote. First Past the Post allows voters to change the government decisively.

You know who kept or did not keep their promises, and there are no excuses. It was a bit disappointing that after the last election, Andrew Weaver said that none of the NDP promises made in the last election counted anymore.

6. No computer voting/counting.


The current system is easy to administer and easy to understand, and we can trust the results are current as they are manually counted and scrutineered. Some, if not all of the proportion rep systems proposed would require computer tabulation to arrive at results on election night or say which parties get how many seats based in an obscure formula. Let's keep voting simple.

7. You might not get what you want.

One of the curious features of the current debate is that many people who tend to support the Greens or NDP seem to be supportive of Proportional Representation. The expectation seems to be that a Green/NDP coalition would rule B.C. in perpetuity. It would be wrong to assume a very different system would lead to people voting exactly the same way they do now. Federally, the Conservatives have received 28 to 35 per cent of the popular vote in B.C. over the last few elections.

With Proportional Representation, one could expect the party to drop their coalition with the BC Liberals, and run competitive campaigns provincially. The Liberals would move to the centre, and push the NDP to the left. Combined, Federally, the Liberals and Conservatives have won 60 to 66 per cent of the vote in B.C. in every election this century. If you are voting for proportional representation because you are hoping for a perpetual NDP/Green government, don't count on it.

There is no perfect electoral system, and no one has a crystal ball and knows how B.C. will fare in the next few decades under first past the post or one of the three proposed PR systems. However, there is value in our current system — it is stable, we keep extreme parties out of power, we directly elect all our politicians, so they are accountable to voters, not political party overlords, ensure our ridings are a manageable size, and we can get rid of governments when needed. Please make sure you vote in the upcoming referendum. Either way, B.C. Politics will continue to be interesting.

https://www.squamishchief.com/squam...TlCQNMdyRYxecJuzsEpchta3aG2AmOnFLUntFB5qSJX9Q
 
Another explainer
 
Thanks for all who have posted. I was set to basically ignore this as it was hard to cut through the 'noise' and understand who the people were behind some of the official looking information. Which turns out, much of what I was reading was propoganda.

After looking at what I can deem as non partisan information, as best I can. Things become a lot more clear.

Agreed with many here that no system is perfect. However, after what I feel is a proper and adequate amount of research, I can see exactly what system is the right one to vote for, through my lens anyway.
 
Back
Top