You'd be welcome to call it the Twigg Formula - a system that would put the peoples' interests First
Through-out the province of BC recently, there has been
much talk about electoral reform --- what it should look like, how it will be
achieved, how we as
voters will have input to the process, what a referendum
question(s) should look like, what kind of majority would be required to have a
change made. These, just to name a few,
are the questions being asked.
BC Attorney General David Eby (right), campaigning
in May 2017. The BC NDP promised to hold a
referendum on a new voting system for the province |
For many, the name John Twigg will be familiar. He recently submitted his thoughts to the BC governments Citizen Engagement,
as well as forwarding those thoughts to me, Bob Makin, Bill Tieleman (co-chair of the No B.C. Proportional Representation Society),
the BC Pundit, and BC NDP Attorney General David Eby.
Here are those thoughts:
The NDP does have "democratic" in its name but
its past and present practices too often have shown that that can be a
misnomer.
I want a reformed electoral system that will still tend to
elect majority governments composed mainly of people of all races, creeds,
genders etc representing clearly distinct regions geographically, with very
little if any gerrymandering such as Gracie's notorious finger.
The current range of population per riding needs to
adjusted because there are too many big ridings with too-few people; they need
to be consolidated and the MLAs and candidates specially assisted with travel
costs.
I'd like to see a Legislature of up to 99 or 100 seats and
no more (at least for a few elections), which would include about 90 people
elected in territories as now (except with the above-mentioned population
adjustments) and about 10 people chosen in one or more processes to reflect
smaller parties, ethnic groups, regional interests, maybe gender balance, maybe
talent and/or popularity (eg someone who lost a seat by 10 votes or so).
Perhaps some could be chosen by an independent panel chaired by the chief
electoral officer. Perhaps some could be selected in a subsequent election off
of a list.
These 10 "proportional" MLAs would have full
voice in the Legislature and powers to sit on committees and have offices and
staff, etc., but their voting powers in the Legislature would be limited so
they could not defeat a government or defeat a budget - but they could have a
positive impact, especially if Question Period was extended and this group was
given a rotating turn. And if there was a tied count on a confidence vote THEN
they could break the tie.
The idea that (for example) the Green Party should have
15% of the seats and votes because their candidates collectively pulled 15% of
the popular vote is NOT a good idea and in fact is a very bad idea and is NOT
"democratic" but instead over-weighs minority special interests. This
has proven to be a disaster in several European countries. Likewise any gender
quotas or orientation, ethnic or religion quotas - NO!
The idea that the BC Conservative Party should get 7% of
the seats because its candidates pulled in 7% of the vote is even more
ludicrous. Perhaps the threshold for such seats should be 10% of the provincial
popular vote.
The British Parliamentary System that the BC Legislature
follows and imitates has proven to be an efficient way for governments to
govern with a balance of both pragmatic practicality and intellectual and
political diversity. It should be retained but augmented to better reflect
B.C.'s diverse population and geography.
And then there is the elephant in the room: new voting
technologies. Maybe even instant universal referendums on issues of the day or
week.
So I favour an evolution to be revisited as soon as
practicable after it has had a chance to work, or not.
I'm not sure what label that formula fits best under.
You'd be welcome to call it the Twigg Formula - a system that would put the
peoples' interests First.
John Twigg
Comments
Post a Comment