[fvc-wat-disc] Record article today (letters neded!)

[Alida and George]

Phil Jalsevac is a life member of the PC party , and probably straight 
Conservative nationally (unless he has done the Damascus trip recently)

George
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Tanguay" <btanguay at wlu.ca>
To: <fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: [fvc-wat-disc] Record article today (letters neded!)


> Phil Jalsevac has had a heck of a time getting his head around MMP. He's
> describing a parallel system and I distinctly, explicitly outlined the
> differences between MMP and MMM to him.
>
> For what it's worth, I don't think it's intentional on Phil's part. I
> have spoken at length with Phil and tried to walk him through the
> proposed system. But MMP IS too difficult for some people to grasp, it
> seems!
> Brian
>
>>>> paul_nijjar at yahoo.ca 9/8/2007 12:38 PM >>>
> The good news: the Record article made the front page, above the
> fold.
> You can read it online here:
>
> http://news.therecord.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/239133
>
> The not-so-good news: The article is misleading with respect to the
> role of the party vote:
>
> "Thirty-nine seats would be filled proportionately according to the
> votes parties get from the parties portion of the ballot. These MPPs
> would come from a list drafted by the parties before the election
> campaign begins."
>
> and in the sidebar:
>
> "In other words, voters would see a two-pronged ballot. They would
> vote for a candidate the traditional way in each riding. They would
> also show a party preference by voting for a party. Percentages of
> party vote determine how the 39 seats are divided up."
>
> These statements are totally misleading, and verging on incorrect.
> They make it sound as if the list seats are allocated proportionally
> to party vote, so if a party gets 30% of the party vote they get 30%
> of the list seats. This is WRONG. If a party gets 30% of the party
> vote they get 30% of the TOTAL seats (so if they won 24% of the
> legislature via ridings they get another 6% of their seats through
> the list).
>
> This is a subtle difference but it is very important, and LOTS of
> people are getting the two confused. Worse, the Referendum Ontario
> brochure also uses misleading wording that makes the same mistake.
> The Record article does get the details right at one point (their
> three step process of how the ballot works) but I think people will
> still be confused.
>
> Please submit some letters to the editor clarifying this point. You
> can submit them to letters at therecord.ca . They should be no longer
> than 300 words, and should include your name, address and telephone
> number. Most of the article is okay, so we should congratulate them
> for finally giving the referendum some priority coverage.
>
> (If you are still confused about the difference, I wrote a longer
> explanation on my lousy blog:
>
> http://pnijjar.livejournal.com/22127.html)
>
> - Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul Nijjar  http://www.fairvotecanada.org/WaterlooRegion
> Next Referendum Info Session: Sept 11, 7pm
> (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
> _______________________________________________
> fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
>