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

FELDSTED: Further strengthening their stranglehold over governance is not in the interests of those governed


The basic premise of democracy is governance of the people, by the people for the people. It was conceived to avoid rule by armies, cabals, churches, gentry or kings.

From October 22 to November 30, British Columbia residents will be asked to mail in a ballot in a Referendum on Proportional Representation. They will either vote to maintain the current First-Past-The-Post system or change to one of three proportional systems offered by the government.

Unfortunately, the only proportional systems on the ballot are ‘Party Systems’ in which parties choose some of the MLAs. There are proportional systems in which voters choose all the MLAs. Unfortunately, none of these will be on the ballot.

In 2004, the Citizen's Assembly, a randomly chosen group of voters, looked at all forms of proportional representation. They rejected the systems in which parties choose some of the MLAs and recommended a system called STV in which citizens vote for all their MLAs. The government has chosen to limit choices to proportional systems in which parties choose some of your MLAs for you.

Any proportional representation choice will see a significant shift of power from voters to political parties. This is of grave concern.

Political party executives, governance boards and hirelings are not elected. They are not responsible to the people of British Columbia. No matter how bad their decisions or how inane their influence, they cannot be voted out or replaced.

Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, embodied in our constitution, states that:

3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

British Columbians have a right to vote for an elect a member of the BC Legislature. There is no provision for a political party or any other entity to change the results of an electors’ choice.

Political parties are already infringing on the Charter right to be considered for office. They hold internal contests for the right to run for office in a constituency, and can refuse to endorse or allow someone to run for office, if they do not adhere to party rules and ideologies. They are controlling the representatives chosen by the people, which is a violation of the basic premise of democracy.

Further strengthening their stranglehold over governance is not in the interests of those governed.


Political parties use the excuse that without party discipline, the legislature would be ungovernable. Anyone who has attended a session of the legislature, or watched question period on television, will confirm that a party disciplined legislature is a cacophony of competing interests devoid of common sense, decorum, ethics, etiquette, politeness and respect. British Columbians deserve much better.

The major proponents of proportional representation are minority political parties who claim that because they achieved 2% or 5% of the popular vote, they are entitled to a similar proportion of the seats in the legislature.

A quick look at the 2017 BC election results shows:

2017 BC RESULTS
PARTY
ELECT
PROP
Liberal
43
35
NDP
41
35
Green
3
15
Other
-
1
Indep.
-
1

87
87

Redistribution by popular vote would favour the green party, but raises three important questions:

  1. Which 12 electoral districts that did not elect a green party member would have their elected representative tossed? 
  2. How will one person represent the 16 different ‘other’ parties involved? 
  3. Which independent candidate will be awarded a seat (31 ran) and who will he or she replace?


Political parties are incapable of working out how proportional representation will operate, in the best interests of the people they claim to serve. Following an election, the public can look forward to months of party bickering over how the spoils will be divided while the legislature sits empty. If that rocks you boat, vote for a change, but remember:



John Feldsted
Political Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

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...

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...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more