Proportional Representation Poll

That poll show's such divide amongst Canadians.

Kevin

---
"Love actually, is all around us" --From the movie Love Actually.

What do you people expect, people know nothing in this country.

At work, I was surprised how many people haven't heard about pro rep, even the ones who follow politics and vote. Still, alot of opinion-makers are behind it, its being considered in 5 provinces (PQ, ON, BC, NB, PEI). I am though a little worried how fast Layton is pushing ahead with this (we can't afford to lose). <p> As with all polls, this one depends on the question. Here it is presented either/or--either first-past-the post, or something new. It should be stressed to people the best pro rep for Canada would still include first-past-the post riding reps but would add ones elected by % of popular vote to make Parliament better reflect voter intentions. But my understanding of the most probably pro rep system is one that would <i>mix</i> first past the post and % of pop vote. <p>---<br>If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan

The new system would probably look something like this:

http://www.lcc.gc.ca/en/themes/gr/er/er ... ations.asp

This is why people are not attracted to proportional representation. The explanation of how it would work has all the clarity of a lecture on flavors of Quarks in Quantum Theory. <p>I just got done delivering 1600 Fair Vote Canada proportional representation flyers door to door in Edmonton and the explanation of how it works was non-existant. <p>If we are to get Canadians to go for this system we must devise one that is comprehensible at a glance. I wouldn't vote for the system outlined at the gov't of Canada site above. <p>Is there some reason that we can't figure out a coherent proportional representation system? Let's put some thought into this because if we don't keep our concepts sharper than <b>Hell</b> you know what we will get.

Final results were 51% for, 49% against pro rep. Total votes cast: 31302 <p> I guess <i>a lot</i> more education is needed. <p> <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.Page/document/polls/pollResults?id=26456&pollid=26456&save=_save&show_vote_always=no&poll=GAMFront&hub=Front&subhub=VoteResult">Results</a> </p><p>---<br>If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan

If 51% were for, I actually see that as a positive......means many people are not satisfied, whereas many "For" votes could be simply uninformed.


-Perturbed.

The CBC has a very understandable explanation of pro rep online--might be a good place to point people or print out. <p> <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/analysiscommentary/electoralreform.html">CBC on Pro Rep</a> </p><p>---<br>If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan

What is needed is an explanation of the system we propose to use in Canada. People I talked to at the door had no problem understanding the idea behind proportional representation but they did want to know what system we would use and how it would work in detail. So I think we should devise a system before the politicians do it for us.

Milton,

I wanted to thank you for working so hard for democratic reform. Larry Gordon's FVC cluster emails mentioned how hard you were working. I've done my small part here in rural B.C.. The all-candidates meeting and I attended the Citizens Assembly meeting held in the nearest city to me an hour and a half away by car and distributed fliers there. At least the people there were open to the idea already.

I agree with you that it does take some study to understand all the different kinds of proportional representational systems that are already in form around the world, but the really great thing about PR is that it can be tailor made to suit your countries needs. There is no hard and fast rule that it has to be one way. Although I do agree it will have to be easy to explain to people otherwise they'll reject it because (whining sounds) "it's too hard and I don't get it".

I'm still more inclined toward independent MPs though and a reasonable limit to campaign spending. No more if you have all the money you win. If we ever want to get rid of CCCE and Fraser Institue types out of our government we HAVE TO have as much citizens imput as possible so that corporate influence is shut out and shut up. What we have now is working so well for the corporations they're going to be ugly, real ugly when we want to change. Even with PR though there are ways to make it impossible for Corporations to donate to one party and EXPECT it to win. The outcomes are so much more unpredictable that they could be just pissing their donations away. (That would be so wonderful).

I wish I could have been selected to be on our BC Citizens Assembly, what an experience those 160 people must be having. I was so envious of the 10 members that attended our meeting. It just seemed like such an honour for them to be a part of history making in BC. I sure hope they decide to give us the referendum and a Mixed Member form of PR. (There's even different ways to implement that.)

I agree with you. People will not go for something new unless they fully understand what it is all about especially if it has to do with our political system. People are lerry about politics and politicians at the best of times.

None of this is going to come easy. If a party feels strongly about this they have to sell it to Canadians. People just don't buy on so easily anymore. Its going to take lots of time and energy.

How about having <u>each riding</u> put representatives into Ottawa, based on the popular vote, with a cut-off at 10%? But the ridings would be condensed to about 100, instead the present 308, as each riding would be represented (proportionately) by at least 3 reps. The pay scale for these reps would be based on the popular vote as well.<p>---<br>RickW