IAN C MacLEOD: The “my vote doesn’t count” argument is bogus, unless one believes “also-rans” deserve “participation medals”

Guest Commentator Ian MacLeod
-- see full BIO below --

Today, we have a Guest Post from Ian MacLeod, who says ... the Proportional Representation (PR) referendum before BC today must be defeated, both due to the rigged and deeply flawed process and on the long-term damage a yes vote would do to BC.  Here's why ...

FIRST, the process is rigged and fatally flawed, and fails on at least 3 counts:

“A pig in the poke”: Unlike 2005 and 2009, there was no real consultation as to the options. If we vote yes to PR on this incomplete package, we then have to choose from three options without the real and meaningful details (size of ridings, number of members per riding, method of selecting PR “top-ups”, etc) – a real “pig in the poke”.

A rigged choice: It is rigged to support the extorted deal with the Green Party. Proportional Representation (PR) is the only option offered, not surprisingly, the one most suited to the Greens. The Greens have never earned more than 17% of the popular vote (averaging about 11% over the past 5 BC elections), but believe that should entitle them to seats and perhaps, like now, a disproportionate balance of power.

As few as perhaps 6% of eligible BC voters could fundamentally change BC’s electoral system: There are no minimum thresholds of votes, whether by total responses or regional distribution, required to have a so called binding vote on the new, foggy, PR model. That is problematic in three ways:

… if only 30% of eligible voters respond (not inconceivable, as mail-in votes have notoriously low response rates), 15% + 1 of eligible voters will fundamentally change the structure of our voting system and impose PR on everyone else, without even knowing the model;

… if the Lower Mainland votes yes and the rest of the province no, the rest of the province is screwed, being swamped by the higher population in the lower mainland; and

… if only 15% plus 1 (as noted above) succeed in imposing PR, marginally over one third of those (i.e. slightly over 5% of eligible voters!) could impose one of the three un-detailed options on the whole Province (ironically, akin to a perverse FPTP on the option).

This is not fair, not reasonable and it could have dangerous repercussions.

SECOND, as to substance, and with apologies to David Letterman, here is a “Top 10 List” of why PR would be a terrible choice for BC:

10. PR is not about good government, but rather about often be single issue, “me first” advocacy.  Normally, political parties try to build consensus in order to get as wide as possible support in order to run as a “government in waiting”. However, PR promotes “me first”. The “my vote doesn’t count” argument is bogus, unless one believes “also-rans” deserve “participation medals”. It is bizarre that parties attaining maybe only 10% or 15% of the vote, and being even third place or worse finishers, could be granted seats that may give them the balance of power - 85% or 90% of the voters did not vote for them!

9. PR nearly always leads to minority governments and backroom deals and prostituted power: Throughout the world, 87% of governments under PR are coalition, minority governments. Only 23% are with First Past the Post (FPTP) are. Those coalition, minority governments only exist due to backroom, often extorted deals, that favour the single-issue party’s interests, not the electorate at large. They can win a few seats, then the larger parties prostitute their seats for power. For example, look at the disproportionate power of religious conservatives in Israel.

8. Paralysis in forming governments. In addition to the backroom deal making and increased costs, paralysis can never be viewed as leading to “good government”. In spite of the positive spin put on in by PR supporters, PR is not always “wine and roses”. For example:
… recently, Germany, New Zealand, Sweden and others, had “hung parliaments”.
… in 2010, it took Belgium 541 days (18 months!) to form a government.
… Italy has had 62 governments in 72 years!
… in New Zealand, the sitting Prime Minister went on maternity leave, and the unelected, PR appointed Deputy Prime Minister, headed their government for 6 weeks.

7. PR can allow fringe (even Fascist) parties to establish and then build on, a PR toehold. Looking at Europe today, this is not fear mongering. In Sweden, a far-right party has just “earned” the balance of power. Likewise, in Germany, Austria, Hungary, Poland and Italy. Looking to history, between 1918 and 1939, 15 PR European countries (including Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece) fell to dictatorships. No FPTP countries did. Scarily, today, many Western democracies are paralleling the 1930s, with growing nationalism, trade barriers and right-wing parties, feeding on PR seats. It can happen again!

6. Voter representation, and MLA accountability, are diminished (part 1).  PR members will likely be chosen from party lists as, by definition, they will not have received the most votes in any riding. Their first loyalty will always be, and has to be, to the party appointing them, not to the constituents (who did not directly elect them).

5. Voter representation and MLA accountability are diminished (part 2). To make room for PR members without a huge increase in the number of MLAs (although there will be some), ridings will be much bigger and multi-member (yet again, no details – just “trust us, we’re the government”). Under the model BC rejected in 2009, Princeton would have been in the same riding as Quesnel, 550 km away. How can an MLA ever know or properly represent such a large and diverse area?

4. Voter representation and MLA accountability diminished (part 3).  As above, those larger ridings will be multi-member - between 2 and 7 MLAs, from different parties (yet again, “trust us”). That means that those MLAs could well be working at cross purposes. Worse, on any unpopular issue, they can avoid accountability by “passing the buck” to the others.

3. Debt and Taxes will certainly go up (part 1).  In all likelihood, PR in BC will add up to 10 additional MLAs (another one of those pesky details on which we will have to “trust” the NDP / Green government), each one with a staff, Victoria and constituency offices, salaries, expense accounts, pensions, and so on, again, paid for by the taxpayer.

2. Debt and Taxes will certainly go up (part 2).  PR jurisdictions typically operate with coalition governments, leading to significantly more elections. Each election in BC costs about $45 million, paid for by the taxpayer, each time.

1. Debt and Taxes will certainly go up (part 3). Minority governments under PR systems, “buying off” the fringe parties, spend substantially more (on average, 30% of GDP vs 24%), driving up debt and taxes, a lot!

If we must change, let’s start with a fair and open discussion, like in 2005 and 2009 – not this rigged and undefined process.

In the meantime, “first past the post” has generally given BC stable governments for 146 years. It may not be perfect, but it is better than all the others (to paraphrase Winston Churchill, on democracy).

About Ian C MacLeod:

Ian C. MacLeod is a retired lawyer. Before law, he spent 15 years as a BC banker (4 as a small-town branch manager). He has lived or worked in 14 BC communities, in all regions and sizes, plus 3 others in Nova Scotia and Quebec. Ian has been heavily involved in volunteer community service, serving on the leadership of over 40 volunteer and community organizations, heading 14 of them. He has written widely on public policy issues, and has received several awards, including the Canada 125 Medal (1992) and the Queen’s Golden Jubilee Medal (2002).