[fvc-wat-disc] Report From Wednesday Night at the ERRE Committee Meeting In Toronto

[Cathy Scott]

Hi, Sharon

Thanks for the synopsis of the meeting in Toronto.  It sounds very hopeful for meaningful change toward PR.

Cathy

 

From: fvc-wat-disc [mailto:fvc-wat-disc-bounces at listserv.thinkers.org] On Behalf Of Sharon Sommerville
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 1:06 PM
To: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
Subject: [fvc-wat-disc] Report From Wednesday Night at the ERRE Committee Meeting In Toronto

 

Hello FairVoting Friends,

 

 

Last Wednesday, the Electoral Reform Committee met with expert witnesses and the public in Toronto.  Four of our FairVote community, Shannon & Michael Purvess-Smith, Dave Arthur and myself, attended the meeting. 

Shannon & Michael attended the expert witness testimony session during the day and Dave & I were at the open mic session in the late afternoon and evening.

There was a strong component of FairVote members, labour representatives and Green Party supporters.

We would like to share our impressions of the meeting. 

 

The first witness spoke for keeping FPTP and admitted he was giving opinion not evidence, and did not seem to have much grasp of PR options.

 

The other witness in the first session was a provincial electoral officer spoke for keeping voting simple, offered good points on electoral matters, and may have been wary of difficulties instituting a new system.

 

Neither of the first group seemed as well prepared for the committee’s questions as experts seen in the parliamentary sessions.

 

The second group of witnesses were good with the focus on accommodating Canadians with disabilities including the problems of voting for the blind. They also spoke of the need for more opportunities in politics for women.

 

The committee appeared unbiased, non-partisan, polite and generous to the witnesses, and critical only when obviously necessary.

 

The public had 2 minutes each at the open mic. Dave and I both spoke.  In total, eighty eight people spoke.

Most of them, 95+ %, were in support of proportional representation and no referendum.

 

A few people, 5 or 6, spoke in support of a referendum and fewer for keeping FPTP, generating.

 

There was great diversity in the speakers age and backgrounds.  It was exciting and hopeful to hear that almost everyone want change and a fair electoral system. 

With PR, MMP seemed to be most preferred with a couple interesting variations proposed.

One of the most compelling speakers was a fellow from Barrie who spoke in favour of PR and said that his grandson who is in the Cdn. Forces had just rec'd his paratrooper wings. The gentleman reported that his grandson may be sent to a dangerous hotspot and could be killed. He said, if you can send Cdns. to a place where they might get killed without a referendum then you really don't need a referendum to change how we vote. His comments received thunderous applause.

 

At the end of the meeting, I asked Alexandre Boulerice, an NDP member from Quebec if he thought the committee could reach a consensus.  He replied that it would depend on the sincerity of the Liberals. It offered the audience a good example of how a proportional governing body could work together.

 

To speak directly to the committee, to have our views heard and recorded by the MP's making the recommendation was an exciting and hopeful experience.

 

Best regards,

Sharon

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20160926/bb2602cd/attachment-0002.htm>