[fvc-wat-disc] Saturday's editorial in the Record

[Brian Tanguay]

Yeah, John Roe and the rest of the editorial board are clearly idiots.

I sent a somewhat nasty letter to the editor in response, but have not
received an acknowledgement and doubt that they will print it, on the
pretext that my views are already well known ...

Pisses me off, but I do have rather low expectations of our media.
Brian

>>> paul_nijjar at yahoo.ca 10/8/2007 8:42 PM >>>
Holy moses. I did not see the Record's editorial until just now. They
trashed us on the tired old "list members are unaccountable"
argument. Oy. 

Here's the article. Clearly the Record prefers another 20 years of
phony majorities dominated by the premier, his cabinet and their
unelected, unaccountable advisors to a system that reflects the
actual wishes of voters. 

---

The wrong kind of electoral reform
October 06, 2007
THE RECORD
There's only one good reason to dump the way Ontario voters have
elected provincial politicians for over a century. There's only one
good reason to gamble on a new system of selecting the government
that leads and rules this great province. That reason is democracy --
the government of the people.

If the electoral reform being offered in next Wednesday's
provincewide referendum can strengthen democracy, if it can transfer
into the hands of the people of Ontario more political power, more
authority over their lives and their land, then they should embrace
it. But if the change being proffered fails this most important test,
if it does not demonstrably bolster the health of Ontario democracy,
if, in fact, it threatens to vitiate that democracy by granting more
power to political cliques, then the proposed electoral reform should
be roundly rejected.

So how does the system being proposed -- mixed-member proportional --
stack up? Ontario voters will, as is their right, make up their own
minds. But for our part, we at The Record have concluded that
democracy would suffer badly under a mixed-member proportional system
because such a system would quickly and inevitably cede political
power to political parties and their unelected elites, at the ongoing
expense of ordinary people.

If Ontarians choose mixed-member proportional, the number of members
of the provincial legislature (MPPs) elected to represent geographic
ridings will fall, from the current number of 107 down to 90.
Meanwhile, there will be a new class of MPPs -- 39 members who are
not directly elected by voters but are, instead, appointed by
political parties to the enlarged, 129-seat legislature.

The laudable goal of the mixed-member proportional system is to have
a legislature that matches as closely as possible how citizens
actually vote. And it is true that under our current
first-past-the-post electoral system, political parties that capture
far less than half of the popular vote typically win elections.

Critics of the status quo say it lets a minority of voters enthrone a
majority government that rules with total power. And that smacks of
unfairness. Advocates of a mixed-member proportional system praise it
as more fair because the number of seats a party gets in the
legislature reflects as closely as possible the number of party votes
it receives. There would be two votes on the ballot, remember, one
for a local representative, one for a party.

The 103 Ontarians who joined the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral
Reform and proposed adopting this mixed-member proportional system
deserve applause for their hard work, thoughtfulness and civic
responsibility. However, our respect for them does not diminish our
strong opposition to what they recommend.

A mixed-member proportional system would hurt democracy because it
would reduce the number of directly elected MPPs by more than 15 per
cent. There would be significantly fewer ridings in Ontario and they
would be bigger. Riding MPPs would be responsible for thousands of
more constituents. It is easy to see how this would impede the direct
access of constituents to their representative as well as their
ability to influence that representative.

Then, there is the troubling matter of the 39 non-riding or at-large
MPPs. Directly elected by no one, they would be directly accountable
to no one -- at least to no one outside of the party cadre that put
them on a list. True, the parties would offer some explanation for
their slates of potential appointees. But it would be difficult in
the extreme for voters to examine the many names on a slate for an
ever increasing number of political parties.

It is questionable how much legitimate campaigning such potential
appointees would do in future elections. But what would that matter?
Once installed in the legislature, they would be beyond the reproach
or touch of voters. Future legislatures would be home to two classes
of MPPs, one the traditional riding representative, the other, in all
but name, a senator. Spare us this.

In the past 22 years, each of the three major Ontario parties has
managed to win one or more elections, govern and then be evaluated by
voters under the first-past-the-post system. Governments have been
stable and often accomplished much, but they have also, out of
necessity, been forced to heed the wishes of the people.

To contemplate mixed-member proportional system is to consider a
future of instability, of fragmented and only partially accountable
legislatures fumbling their way under the leadership of perpetual
minority governments. It is also a future in which political parties,
including party hacks, hangers-on and failed politicians, would gain
in influence and power as the already limited authority of ordinary
voters wanes.

To be sure, the way Ontario elects MPPs today has flaws. It could be
improved and perhaps, after this election, Ontarians should continue
searching for a better system. But mixed-member proportional is, in
the final analysis, not a better system. On Oct. 11, please, say no
to this proposed reform.

--
Paul Nijjar  http://www.fairvotecanada.org/WaterlooRegion 
Vote for MMP! http://voteformmp.ca 
(Please use this Yahoo! account for future correspondence.)


      Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk
email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail at
http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca 

_______________________________________________
fvc-wat-disc mailing list
fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org 
http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc