Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

Really, do you go out and purchase an unknown bag of goods, when you go to the store, and then wait until you get home to see what they've given you?


OKAY ... there are three questions I'm wondering about, when it comes to British Columbians deciding on IF we change how we currently vote. And ... if we do, what that new system will be.

Question #1
Why are we not getting an explanation of who will decide on the proportional representative going to legislature.  As it stand now, they won't be voter elected but potentially, at least, party hacks. 

Right now many / most of us complain that our elected representatives DO NOT in fact represent us; instead represent they party they belong to.  Basically they do as they are told.  On the other hand, maybe they will be voter elected, perhaps by using the votes each has received, and picking the one(s) who received the most. 

Then again it would be fair to ask, "Will they be an MLA from the region they were running in, or just a floating not responsible to anyone but the party they represent?"

Are those not good questions -- and how many more can you add to just this one first question?



Here's another good one, I believe.  Question #2
If an MLA resigns or dies, during their term in office, how will they be replaced?  Will it be from the party slate?  Will there be a General Election, and if so, what riding will it be in if they are a floating MLA responsible only to the party they represent?  OR what other possible option, or combination of options might we be looking at?

Hmmmmmmmm ... no answer for that either.


And as for Question #3
Why is the government not willing to show us what the riding boundaries will be, for each of the three voting options we are going to be able to choose from?
I know, we're supposed to trust them.  Here's the thing though, I'm not will to make the buy, without knowing what I'm actually buying.  Really, do you go out and purchase an unknown bag of goods, when you go to the store, and then wait until you get home to see what they've given you?

Now here's what someone said about riding boundaries; "It is not the job of the government to change riding boundaries. The law requires an independent boundaries commission. And that process can take up to 18 months."

And they are right, of course.  It is not the government that decides this ... it is, or will be, an independent commission.

HERE'S THE THING THOUGH.  Anytime we have had changes to riding boundaries (and they were generally jerry-rigged), it was done prior to an election.  In this case, our GreeNDP government is wanting us to change how we vote, PRIOR to knowing what the boundaries will be.

I'm not really very comfortable with that.  And, what's the rush?  We've been voting the way we have for decades and decades; what's one more election?


There's still too many questions, and I for one am willing to wait to have a referendum, until we have all of the answers first -- or at least answers to the majority of the questions I have first. 

IF we all have an understanding that there WILL be a FAIR referendum on how British Columbians vote (on the future make-up of the BC Legislative Assembly), then we can go into the next election knowing NO party will attempt to subvert that will.

The NDP ... The Green Party ... the BC Conservative Party ... the Liberal Party.  ALL should be required to make that commitment

That's the way it really should be, shouldn't it, on a decision like this?

So, at the moment, I can safely say that I am not really warmed up to changing our First Past The Post option of voting.  That said, I am open to finding out more about the options that will be present to us this Fall in the referendum.  That's why I will be attending the Fair Vote Kamloops presentation with Dr. Dennis Pillion of York University, July 4th at 7pm, at the Clocktower Theatre at TRU.  His topic will be, "Changing BC's Voting System, Arguments and Facts"

Meantime, find out everything you can, on the options available to us, and don't be swayed, either way, by a chorus of clanging gongs.  Here's just a few websites that will get you started:

How We Vote: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018AG0041-001071
Fair Ways BC Could Vote:  https://fairvotingbc.com/join-the-campaign-for-fair-voting/fair-ways-bc-could-vote/
Vote No To PR: https://www.nobcprorep.ca/
Elections BC -- 2018 Referendum: https://elections.bc.ca/referenda/

In Kamloops, I'm Alan Forseth ... and I look forward to seeing your thoughts below in the Comment Section.
Labels:

Comments

  1. KurtJune 28, 2018 at 4:45 PM

    Thanks for this article. You pose some really valid questions that need an answer. My guess the answers will be made on the fly after the predetermined outcome is broadcast.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Blakre NewtonJune 28, 2018 at 8:49 PM

    I'll do my best to answer your questions. As to question one, I think that any form of the three types of PR will at least have had an outline of legitimacy should they be adopted. I cannot see for example MMP getting more votes than the alternatives, then shouldered aside in favour of one of the other two. I will point out that when BC was incorporated into confederation, British Columbians of the time wern't given the option of systems to choose. The way I see it is if it comes down to PR versus FPTP and FPTP doesn't win a 50% plus one, then it should be turfed. Just like PR will be. Question #2 is a good one, but let's look to BC history to see what happens. In 2013 when Christy Clark was defeated in Point Grey by David Eby, she basically parachuted into another area that was basically a shoe in. What's the difference then? It was basically acclamation with a (very) thin veneer of democracy. I think that in this case, it would depend on a variety of issues, but as say Germany, Switzerland and New Zealand have proven the answers are there. As for the boundaries question, the fairest way to do that would be an independent (but public) commission. They could again see how these disputes are dealt with by other countries with PR. It is for that reason I am in favour of MMP.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Given the noted infractions of this agreement with OneBC leader Dallas Brodie, I request the Party immediate suspend the leadership campaign of Yuri Fulmer

I have personally emailed the following to the Board and Administration of the Conservative Party of BC:   TODAY (03/30) Yuri Fulmer, a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of BC, made a pact with ONEBC leader Dallas Broldie, that if he is elected will commit the Conservative Party to the following. Specifically, the pact states : This Memorandum of Understanding outlines the definitive electoral and governing alliance that will be executed upon Yuri Fulmer’s election as Leader of the Conservative Party of British Columbia OneBC Party commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in 88 of British Columbia’s 93 electoral districts. In exchange, the Conservative Party of BC, under the leadership of Yuri Fulmer, commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in five (5) specific electoral districts . OneBC will be the sole standard-bearer for the right in those five districts. The specific ridings will be determined through mutual negotiation and fin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Delays to the replacement of the Red Bridge? Kamloops North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer says they are, “Totally Unacceptable.”

I think it’s totally unacceptable that on one hand the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) is saying they’re going to be responsible for putting together multiple replacement options with public engagement, and then in the same breath they're saying, ‘Oh, and by the way, we're going to start our geotechnical environmental and archaeological site assessments on both sides of the river, possibly beginning this summer.’ According to Stamer, that should already have been done. “Obviously, we're pretty sure it will be in the same location because there's really no other place to put it. So, if you're going to put in a bridge, you think that at least you'd be doing the archaeological assessments first off”, stated Stamer.   “If it's determined it has to be a free-span bridge, and it can't have anything or very minimal impact in the riverbed, they should already be determining that. It would help in the design, wouldn't it?” Stamer indicated...
Post a Comment
Read more

MIKE RIGGS -- The candidates who win are the ones who can hold both sides without losing control of the message

If you step back and look at the BC Conservative leadership race, which begin 81 days ago on January 16th, the real difference is not experience, it is approach. Caroline Elliott understands where voters are right now. People are tired of being managed, talked down to, and boxed into rigid policy frameworks. They want someone who reflects their concerns but can still operate in the real world. That is where she separates from someone like Kerry-Lynne Findlay. Findlay represents a more traditional style of politics. She brings experience, but also a more controlled and cautious approach that can feel rigid at a time when voters want responsiveness and adaptability. Elliott is positioning herself differently. She leans more socially conservative in tone, which connects with a base that feels ignored, but she is also showing a willingness to be pragmatic. That balance is what actually wins elections. If you are too rigid, you stall out. If you are too soft, you lose your base. The candida...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more