<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I think that it's very important to make a definite distinction between "minority" governments as we know them under FPTP with their instability and adversarial posturing and "Coalition" governments under MMP that promote co-operation and stability.<BR>Peace <BR>
Rick<BR>> From: adaigen@sympatico.ca<BR>> To: fvc-wat-disc@listserv.thinkers.org<BR>> Subject: RE: [fvc-wat-disc] Basic Canvassing Script<BR>> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:29:05 +0000<BR>> <BR>> Hey,<BR>> <BR>> I like this script--it hits at the meat of the issue, which is that this <BR>> system will actually elect the governments that people voted for.<BR>> <BR>> This may seem obvious, but just to be sure, let's all ready to meet some of <BR>> the following concerns. Not that we'll sway the hard core opposition, but I <BR>> think a lot of people are just afraid and could be convinced by good reason. <BR>> (I think a lot of this may also be at voteformmp.com, so apologies to <BR>> everyone who would already have known what to say.):<BR>> <BR>> They say: "I don't want to lose local representation."<BR>> You say: "Under MMP you'll still have a local representative. And in a way <BR>> you have more local representation, since you can vote for a local candidate <BR>> you like even if you don't like his or her party."<BR>> <BR>> They say: "I'm afraid we'll have permanent minorities and elections every <BR>> year."<BR>> You say: "Actually, parties cooperate to make stable minority governments in <BR>> a lot of countries, like Germany and Ireland. And the parties having to work <BR>> together will mean legislation that represents more people's views."<BR>> <BR>> They say: "Our system has stood the test of time, why change it?"<BR>> You say: "Actually, it hasn't stood the test of time so well--almost all <BR>> first-world countries have switched to some form of proportional voting. <BR>> They see that it's fairer, and it would be fairer here too."<BR>> <BR>> They say: "I vote Liberal, so the FPTP system works for me."<BR>> You say: "Actually, it worked against the Liberals for three straight <BR>> elections. PC and NDP got majorities with 45% and 38% of the vote." and/or <BR>> "Under the current system a lot of Liberal votes are wasted too--if you're <BR>> in a riding that always goes conservative, your vote doesn't matter--but it <BR>> will under MMP." (That could be particularly relevant for those canvassing <BR>> in Kitchener-Waterloo.)<BR>> <BR>> They say: "I vote PC, so first-past-the-post works for me."<BR>> You say: "Actually, the current system hurt the PC in the last <BR>> election--under MMP it would have more seats. And the current system gave <BR>> the Liberals a majority with 46% of the vote--and back in 1990, it gave the <BR>> NDP a majority with 38% of the vote." And/or "Under the current system a lot <BR>> of Conservative votes are wasted too--PC votes in Liberal or NDP ridings <BR>> don't matter, but they will under MMP."<BR>> <BR>> They say: "I don't want unelected Members of Parliament chosen by party <BR>> leaders."<BR>> You say: "Actually, they would be elected--they would be in Parliament <BR>> because their party got a certain amount of votes. (And you would know <BR>> beforehand who they would be, since each party would have its list ready <BR>> before the election. So if you don't like the people on a party's list, you <BR>> can vote against it.)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> I hope that's not too long or too obvious--I just wanted to give some snappy <BR>> answers to questions that will no doubt come up. If we can answer them <BR>> kindly, reassuringly, and intelligently, I think we can be very effective.<BR>> <BR>> Best wishes,<BR>> <BR>> Ari<BR>> <BR>> >From: "Joshua Smyth" <smyth.josh@gmail.com><BR>> >Reply-To: FVC Waterloo Region Discussion <BR>> ><fvc-wat-disc@listserv.thinkers.org><BR>> >To: "FVC Waterloo Region Discussion" <fvc-wat-disc@listserv.thinkers.org><BR>> >Subject: [fvc-wat-disc] Basic Canvassing Script<BR>> >Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:24:53 -0400<BR>> ><BR>> >Here's the text of a basic script for door-to-door work. This is just<BR>> >a quick job, so anyone feel free to edit it and bounce it back to the<BR>> >list. Cheers<BR>> ><BR>> >Vote for MMP – Quick Script<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >Hi there, I'm (blank) representing the Vote for MMP Campaign. Have<BR>> >you heard about the referendum on October 10th?<BR>> ><BR>> >You'll have a chance to choose how you elect members to the Provincial<BR>> >Legislature between the system we have right now, and a new system<BR>> >called Mixed Member Proportional that has been recommended by the<BR>> >Ontario Citizen's assembly.<BR>> ><BR>> >The Citizens Assembly is a group of people that chosen at random (like<BR>> >a jury), one person for each riding, that spent eight months getting<BR>> >educated and having public consultations about possible changes to the<BR>> >electoral system. At the end of this process, they recommended that<BR>> >Ontario adopt a new system that offers more choice, fairer results,<BR>> >and stronger representation.<BR>> ><BR>> >Here's how the new system will work. When you go to the polls, you'll<BR>> >get two votes. One will be for a local riding representative, just<BR>> >like you have now. On the other side of the ballot, you can vote for<BR>> >the party of your choice. In an election under the new system, there<BR>> >will be 129 seats up for election. 90 of them will be riding seats,<BR>> >just like we have now. The other 39 seats will be proportional seats,<BR>> >that will be used to bring a party's share of the legislature as close<BR>> >as possible to their share of the party vote. If a party gets 35% of<BR>> >the vote but only 30 % of the seats from ridings, they will be<BR>> >allocated seats from the proportional section to get them as closes as<BR>> >possible to 35% of the seats. This will be a big change from the<BR>> >system we have now – the Liberals got 46% of the vote, 70% of the<BR>> >seats, and 100% of the power in the last election, and the results<BR>> >were very similar for the PC and NDP before them. That is neither<BR>> >fair nor representative of what the people of Ontario voted for.<BR>> ><BR>> >As well, under the current system, if you vote for a party that<BR>> >doesn't win locally, your vote is essentially wasted – no one goes to<BR>> >parliament to represent your views. The new system would change that:<BR>> >even if the local candidate you prefer doesn't win, your party vote<BR>> >would work to electing MPPs from the party of your choice. No wasted<BR>> >votes. It also means that if you like a local candidate, but don't<BR>> >like his/her party, you can split your vote and still have your views<BR>> >represented.<BR>> ><BR>> >If you have any questions, feel free to give this brochure a look<BR>> >over, or check out the websites listed on it. This is a<BR>> >once-in-a-lifetime chance to change the way politics works in Ontario,<BR>> >so on election day be sure to vote for the Alternative Electoral<BR>> >System proposed by the citizens assembly - if it passes, your voice<BR>> >will be heard much more clearly from now on. Thanks for your time.<BR>> >_______________________________________________<BR>> >fvc-wat-disc mailing list<BR>> >fvc-wat-disc@listserv.thinkers.org<BR>> >http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> fvc-wat-disc mailing list<BR>> fvc-wat-disc@listserv.thinkers.org<BR>> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc<BR><BR><br /><hr />Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger <a href='http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline' target='_new'>Get it now! </a></body>
</html>