BC defeats PR nearly as soundly as PEI and Ontario
With the change of name from "Know STV" to "No STV", the pro-SMP campaign in BC caught up with the rest of the country in defeating FairVote Canada's latest hare-brained scheme. For those in Canada who are serious about electoral reform, there is only one realistic option remaining: Instant Run-Off Voting. It's the only system Canadians will ever get behind, and it offers substantial improvement over the current system without introducing the breakage inherent in proportional representation. See Danielle and Scott among others on the pro-PR side who are coming to this conclusion. FairVote, now is your chance. Join your American counterpart in pushing for the one electoral system that actually offers an improvement.
For a group that purports to promote the democratic process, FairVote must accept the democratic will of the people who have soundly defeated their core ideology of proportional representation three times.
Posted at 13:11 on
May 13, 2009
Column on UK vs CA rail service
Mark Greenan writes at Wed May 13 14:11:16 EDT 2009...
I know you're a smart guy, so you know it's a baldfaced lie when you call STV "FairVote Canada's latest hare-brained scheme".
STV was recommended by the BC Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform and is entirely a product of their work.
David Graham (cdlu.net) writes at Wed May 13 14:17:38 EDT 2009...
You are welcome to continue convincing yourself that STV was produced by the CA in a FairVote-less vacuum. The people have, once again, spoken, and, again, discredited the myth of a Citizens' Assembly.
Ralph Anderson (www.magma.ca/~ralphdsl) writes at Fri May 29 10:30:40 EDT 2009...
I believe that the BC Assembly was asked to offer a system that would represent parties better, and they delivered the more individualist STV, over the more effective MMP (for the stated goal). FVC and others pointed to the 70% of submissions in favour of MMP, and cried foul. The people in that Assembly held on.
I believe that the Ontario Assembly was asked to come up with a better electoral system without specifically demanding "better" party proportionality. And they end up choosing party friendly MMP. The people in that Assembly were overrun.
I remember that in early BC Assembly literature, there was a rhetorical question about deciding if you will vote for candidates or parties. Did any Assembly member say "why not both?".
I remember reading some early Ontario literature that suggested that PR, including MMP, is the way to go if you want your elections to let political parties decide who gets in and what their government will do to you (something like that in a report by Blais and Massicotte). Did any Assembly member say "I want the people to decide who gets in and what our government does?"