A Magic Bullet For PR By Party

This is not fair! It betrays the individual’s political equality of “one voter – one voice”. Apparently in both STV and MMP, we are willing to move off the “one voter – one X” idea. But how can we justify PR by Party when voters will play all the parties to advantage. Making every region exactly the same size will almost do it. The reason for the inequality of voice is PR by Party, and compensating some more, will only lead to greater complexity and increased voter dissatisfaction. And it probably can’t be done with a secret ballot. But, let’s not go there. A party strategy with STV or MMP? The scenario will play out in every region. If there is 60% to be had, there will be a majority … and it will consist of a dynamic, sincere, near perfect candidate per region, drawing votes (in their district AND) in the region, getting elected quite easily … along with several apparently inoffensive party soldiers running on the regional slate (or in “safe” districts) by riding the “mania”. Within their own parties, MPs with vision will be heavily outnumbered by MPs with more practical ambitions. The backroom will be a busy place and the backdoor will be wide open. Matters of interest to the party in power, will have priority over anything that matters to the voters who put them there (Joe Clark would know, and try to remember a people friendly Liberal Caucus revolt that ever worked). If the star candidates fail to bring their regions with them, the party is doomed to minority and these champions of the people will be powerless anyway. They can preach from their pulpits without consequence, and their party looks good. That’s why parties like PR by Party. As silent as they have been, with PR focusing on Party AND Candidate, it seems that Promises and Leaders will also affect the outcome in the real world. This crossing of purposes is entirely at the convenience of the Parties. This would be nothing new. And it is likely to continue under every variation of PR by Party. PR by Party is better than what we have now. “First past the post” doesn’t work very well. Witness the 2004 General Election where 17% of an electorate elected a MP (Saskatoon-Humboldt, just 26.7% of the vote). MMP seems to be in love with it too. And that unclear question doesn’t help either. Is it Leader, Promises, Candidate or just plain Party that got your vote last time? It is a convenient confusion entirely in favour of “Government by the Parties” when it’s supposed to be “Government by the People”. To demonstrate how bad FPTP really is, ask a few clear questions. Vote just on your representation in Parliament (your MP, not the party …). Vote just for the set of promises offered by each party (not their vision). Vote just for the Leader to be Prime Minister. How different it is! How acceptable is it for any of these to claim a victory with as little as 17% support? And it can happen. Even these three FPTP votes would be a lot better than the single FPTP we have now. Election Reform, and a House for People. But FPTP times three, isn’t nearly enough. If you are going to mess with electoral reform, bring back democracy by definition. Have you noticed that those Parties elect their Leaders by runoff ballots. So, I guess they think we’re special. Our Democracy needs help, and you don’t have to change a whole lot! I would like to suggest that Canada needs two votes on voting day? A district level Vote on Representation (your MP), and a national level Vote on Party (the set of promises offered by Parties). For both of these, we need a better ballot. A Condorcet or IRV style ballot will allow us to get majorities (if they are out there) in one trip to the ballot box. As for Prime Minister, I suggest that this position be realistically accountable and recallable … therefore let the House of Commons pick one of their own, by majority of course, and create a British style “1922 Committee” to handle the conditions of just how Recall will come to a vote. There are details and more details, and maybe the devil is in them. But give it some thought.