Vive Le Canada

Preferential Vote Downside

Posted on Friday, July 16 at 08:18 by Jim Callaghan
On Nov. 26 2001 Dalton McGuinty said something he has repeated, in one way or another, ever since: "I think the two alternatives that would be on the table would be preferential balloting, which requires only modest changes to the system that we have in place, and proportional representation, which has various forms found throughout the world." The Liberal platform concludes "After consulting with the public, we will hold a referendum on whether we should keep our winner-take-all voting system or replace it with another." Some people will push for the referendum to be on the preferential ballot. We will have to point out that, in the recent Ontario election, if the New Democrat voters had all given their second preferences to the Liberals (the dream of some Liberals) and vice versa, the results would have been an even more lopsided legislature of 84 Liberals, 11 PCs and 8 NDP. With 12 needed for party status, we would have a result like B.C.: no official opposition. And if the Greens all gave their second preferences to the Liberals as well, the PCs would drop to 7 seats. Surely most Liberals will recognize that this would skew our voting system even more than first-past-the-post does. ******************* For more info: http://www.fairvotecanada.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=364&forum=2&7

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by hoopoe
    Fri Jul 16, 2004 5:39 pm
    No official opposition? Hmmm, that sounds like Alberta for the past 15 years.

  2. by avatar Jesse
    Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:14 pm
    Wait, Alberta is a democracy?

    ---
    Jesse

  3. by Jim Callaghan
    Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:33 am
    Jesse, you sound surprised.


    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  4. by Anonymous
    Sat Jul 17, 2004 5:27 am
    The situtation outlined in the article is more of a reflection of limited choices in our parties. The Liberals take the second votes because they are at the centre.

    This is all the more reason why we should adopt prefferential voting, it would send th emessage to the Conservatives and NDP to forget their dogmatic platforms and move to policy more in tune with mainstream Canada.

  5. by Anonymous
    Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:00 am
    Whatever FPTP system is used, an element of proportionality should be added to it. Just look at what went on in Alberta (Conservatives get 60% of the vote and 90% of the seats), and Ontario (Liberals get 45% of the vote and 75% of the seats).

    As for the Conservatives and NDP moving to the centre. It's not much of a choice if you have to choose between three parties with essentially the same platform. Don't forget that these two parties and their "dogmatic" platforms received 45% of the vote.

  6. by LinuxLuver
    Sat Jul 17, 2004 11:10 am
    I agree. Proportional representation (PR) is the best way to go.

    The preferential system is used in Australia and has produced a VERY rigid, two-party system - much like the US. (Labor vs the National / Liberal Coalition).

    In the past 85 years, a handful of independent have won seats and only ONE 3rd-party MP has ever been elected: a Green MP last years won a seat that had been safe for Labor since 1954....becasue voters were very unhappy with the Australian Labor Party's weak opposition to Australia joining the invasion of Iraq. Most Australians were opposed to the invasion.....but the voting system had given them a government that knew it didn't have to listen to them.

    By comparison, New Zealand has a proportional voting system (since 1996) and there are 7 parties in the parliament. If you want representation and constant feedback between elected and electors, then you want PR.

    If you want a government that will do as it pleases and ignore you until a few months prior to the election (sound familiar?), then you want preferential voting. Like Australia.

  7. by avatar Milton
    Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:04 pm
    We need <b>proportional representation</b> not preferential representation. No second choices, you vote for one candidate and that is all. If we have to devise a "canadian" type of proportional representation system then lets get on with it.

  8. by Jim Callaghan
    Sun Jul 18, 2004 8:45 pm
    Has anyone considered the complexity of preferential voting ?

    If there are 5 candidates, then you rank them from your most favourite to your least favourite, and then choose a party as one more consideration.

    Do you really thing the "average" Canadian voter is going to go to the trouble to do all this ? As well as do all the research necessary to get it right ?

    Not on a bet !


    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  9. by Anonymous
    Mon Jul 19, 2004 3:00 pm
    The way it works in Australia is that the parties distribute cards to their supporters telling them how the party thinks they ought to fill in their preferences. There tends to be quite a bit of bargaining over these and the directives can vary from riding to riding. For example, the Greens in a particular riding might make a deal with the rightwing Liberals whereby, the Greens will instruct their supporters to rank the Liberals ahead of Labour in exchange for the Liberals outbidding Labour in tersm of promising to stop clear cut logging in the area etc...

    Other times parties send out nationawide directives. For example a few years ago, the Liberals got inot a lot of trouble and lost some upscale urban ridings because they told their people to rank the racist One Nation Party ahead of Labour. A lot of socially liberal Liberals were horrified and voted against the Liberals for that reason alone.

    All to say that preferential balloting has its own culture and would have many intended and unintended consequences - some for the better anmd some for the worse.

  10. by gina
    Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:20 am
    www.politicswatch.com had a cute little quiz that offered a series of questions on all the election issues and you answered according to rank how you felt about the issues. The result of the quiz was to inform you which of the four major party platforms best reflected your views. Mine was bang on. One person however was confused that while she was a Liberal after taking the quiz the party that best reflected her views was the NDP. She never thought that her party might not be the party she thought it was but that there was something wrong with the quiz. Others were upset that the Green Party was not included in the quiz and the site agreed to include them in the next election. I think the quiz is an excellent idea. It was fun, easy and I believe it was quite accurate. It will either reinforce your decision or make you ask a lot more questions of your party of choice.

    ---
    gina

  11. by Jim Callaghan
    Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:34 pm
    Layton first, harper last.

    Just as I expected.


    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  12. by avatar Jesse
    Sat Jul 24, 2004 6:50 pm
    I did that quiz as well(and passed the URL around), and it was very accurate. I'm glad to hear that they took user feedback seriously and will improve the quiz for future elections!

    ---
    Jesse



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.



Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

sitemap | feeds | privacy | copyright | contact
canadian bloggers | canadian news