In case you have forgotten, the referendum on our electoral system will be occurring alongside the provincial election. For those who need more information, here are the YES and NO campaigns.
Keep it simple. One "X" beside a name of choice, dunk into the ballot box and you're done.
If that passes, the nomination process and the representation outcomes here in Burnaby are going to end up in a real mess come the next election after this one.
So the first two 'anonymous's think our current flawed First Past the Post system is the way to go? That's not what most British Columbians think. Most of us are tired of our votes not counting and want a voting system that will make sure our legislature accurately reflects what we say on our ballots. Fairness, choice, increased voter power - all great reasons to support BC-STV, which the Citizens' Assembly recommended nearly unanimously (95% in favour).
Anonymous 3 - MMP is a fine system which has much in common with STV, particularly a good dose of proportionality (fairness). Most electoral reformers think that the differences between MMP and STV amount to trying to decide whether one gets an A and the other a B (or vice versa) when our current FPTP system rates a bare pass.
So the first two 'anonymous's think our current flawed First Past the Post system is the way to go? That's not what most British Columbians think.
Actually they do. If the "majority" have endorsed the initiative, they would have shown that by now.
Most of us are tired of our votes not counting and want a voting system that will make sure our legislature accurately reflects what we say on our ballots.
Ballots do count, sunshine. But there needs to be revision, but the BC-STV is not the way to go. You'll end up with regional representation, and fights over who gets to represent whom in these multiple seat regional ridings. Not to mention the fights that will occur amongst contenders within each party as to who gets to be the better top candidate over the others.
Fairness, choice, increased voter power - all great reasons to support BC-STV, which the Citizens' Assembly recommended nearly unanimously (95% in favour).
The Citizen's Assembly recommended.
Anonymous 3 - MMP is a fine system which has much in common with STV, particularly a good dose of proportionality (fairness). Most electoral reformers think that the differences between MMP and STV amount to trying to decide whether one gets an A and the other a B (or vice versa) when our current FPTP system rates a bare pass.
Another good system to use is that used in Australia which has state level legislative districts of the same relative size to our provincial districts. They vote for one MLA only, not a collection and they do it on the proportional system.
If the BC-STV model scrapped the regional legislative districts, to a more smaller manageable one equating our existing district structure then there would be more acceptance of the STV.
6 Comments:
Haven't forgotten about it at all.
When I see the ballot, I'm voting "NO".
Keep it simple. One "X" beside a name of choice, dunk into the ballot box and you're done.
If that passes, the nomination process and the representation outcomes here in Burnaby are going to end up in a real mess come the next election after this one.
I agree NO is the way to go
I like Mixed Member Proportional - the system used in most of the Civilized world such as Germany and France?
But then again, I like punk rock music, too.
Go Joey Shithead!
Rock Music rocks.
Go Meatloaf.
So the first two 'anonymous's think our current flawed First Past the Post system is the way to go? That's not what most British Columbians think. Most of us are tired of our votes not counting and want a voting system that will make sure our legislature accurately reflects what we say on our ballots. Fairness, choice, increased voter power - all great reasons to support BC-STV, which the Citizens' Assembly recommended nearly unanimously (95% in favour).
Anonymous 3 - MMP is a fine system which has much in common with STV, particularly a good dose of proportionality (fairness). Most electoral reformers think that the differences between MMP and STV amount to trying to decide whether one gets an A and the other a B (or vice versa) when our current FPTP system rates a bare pass.
So the first two 'anonymous's think our current flawed First Past the Post system is the way to go? That's not what most British Columbians think.
Actually they do. If the "majority"
have endorsed the initiative, they would have shown that by now.
Most of us are tired of our votes not counting and want a voting system that will make sure our legislature accurately reflects what we say on our ballots.
Ballots do count, sunshine. But there needs to be revision, but the BC-STV is not the way to go. You'll end up with regional representation, and fights over who gets to represent whom in these multiple seat regional ridings. Not to mention the fights that will occur amongst contenders within each party as to who gets to be the better top candidate over the others.
Fairness, choice, increased voter power - all great reasons to support BC-STV, which the Citizens' Assembly recommended nearly unanimously (95% in favour).
The Citizen's Assembly recommended.
Anonymous 3 - MMP is a fine system which has much in common with STV, particularly a good dose of proportionality (fairness). Most electoral reformers think that the differences between MMP and STV amount to trying to decide whether one gets an A and the other a B (or vice versa) when our current FPTP system rates a bare pass.
Another good system to use is that used in Australia which has state level legislative districts of the same relative size to our provincial districts. They vote for one MLA only, not a collection and they do it on the proportional system.
If the BC-STV model scrapped the regional legislative districts, to a more smaller manageable one equating our existing district structure then there would be more acceptance of the STV.
But this initiative may very well be defeated.
Post a Comment
<< Home