Proposed electoral change not well explained


The electorate are being ill served regarding the possible change in our current voting system.

I have attended two presentations, one by Fair Vote Canada in Sooke and the other by two New Democrat MPs in Langford.

In both cases, about 30 minutes was spent stating the faults in our first-past-the-post system; then 60 minutes or more on proportional representation, pushing their own agendas.

It was left to the attendees to pick up pamphlets to try to understand the various alternatives: single transferrable vote, mixed member proportional and rural-urban proportional. There are doubtless a few variations to these three.

In neither instance was there any attempt to give an oral explanation of the three systems.

I feel that most voters are equipped to respond to a referendum to choose a different voting system. I favour the single transferrable vote, recommended in B.C. by the Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform. It did not receive the percentage of votes required by the government of the time.

Too much effort was put into explaining the method of counting votes, rather than telling voters they only needed to number their preferences 1,2, 3, etc.

The explanations of mixed-member and rural-urban proportional are far more complicated and thus most of the electorate would, I believe, have far more difficulty in choosing from among the three, making a referendum useless.

Eric W. Hurwood


© Copyright Times Colonist

Source link