header image
The world according to David Graham


acva bili chpc columns committee conferences elections environment essays ethi faae foreign foss guelph hansard highways history indu internet leadership legal military money musings newsletter oggo pacp parlchmbr parlcmte politics presentations proc qp radio reform regs rnnr satire secu smem statements tran transit tributes tv unity

Recent entries

  1. Why do lockdowns and pandemic restrictions continue to exist?
  2. Parliamentary privilege: an arcane concept that can prevent coups
  3. It's not over yet
  4. Trump will win in 2020 (and keep an eye on 2024)
  5. A podcast with Michael Geist on technology and politics
  6. Next steps
  7. On what electoral reform reforms
  8. 2019 Fall campaign newsletter / infolettre campagne d'automne 2019
  9. 2019 Summer newsletter / infolettre été 2019
  10. 2019-07-15 SECU 171
  11. 2019-06-20 RNNR 140
  12. 2019-06-17 14:14 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  13. 2019-06-17 SECU 169
  14. 2019-06-13 PROC 162
  15. 2019-06-10 SECU 167
  16. 2019-06-06 PROC 160
  17. 2019-06-06 INDU 167
  18. 2019-06-05 23:27 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  19. 2019-06-05 15:11 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  20. 2019-06-04 INDU 166
  21. 2019-06-03 SECU 166
  22. 2019 June newsletter / infolettre juin 2019
  23. 2019-05-30 RNNR 137
  24. 2019-05-30 PROC 158
  25. 2019-05-30 INDU 165
  26. 2019-05-29 SECU 165
  27. 2019-05-29 ETHI 155
  28. 2019-05-28 ETHI 154
  29. 2019-05-28 ETHI 153
  30. 2019-05-27 ETHI 151
  31. older entries...

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 11:11 on May 13, 2009

This entry has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.

Police Week | reform | 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.

FairVote, RIP.

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?"

(RSS) Website generating code and content © 2001-2020 David Graham <david@davidgraham.ca>, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Comments are © their respective authors.