<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">As long as I have been listening to FVC
the mantra has been: Fair Vote does not support a single system,
but the principle of ProportionalRepresentation.<br>
<br>
Now FVC has not only designed its own system.<br>
<br>
As someone who knows well what it's like to be a rural person
lacking representation, I hold a great deal of personal dislike
for this particular system which I see as throwing rural folk
under the bus in much the same way they were in the hybrid system
we had for a time in parts of western Canada did. So I complained
a bit, and I understand urban dwellers don't get it, but rural
dwellers are in a minority, so it doesn't really matter as far as
getting PR goes. That said, I understand the reason for having
such a system as a choice. <br>
<br>
The problem is Fair Vote seems to be running around actively
selling its new system every chance it gets. I get that... I
understand people I know and respect have been actively involved
in the system's development, and that these folks are proud of the
system in which they have invested so much time and energy. <br>
<br>
At any other time it wouldn't be a biggie, but at *this* time what
it is doing is distracting from getting PR.<br>
<br>
The biggest single issue with getting PR is that, even though most
Canadians know something is wrong (why getting rid of FPTP
resonates) most people don't know what is wrong. People don't
know the jargon, something made worse by the fact there are no
standards so different people use different words for the same
thing or the same words for different things. You can't even have
a conversation without teaching the person you are talking to what
the issue is even about.<br>
<br>
Which is why I see no value (and in fact, distinct detriment) in
Fair Vote adding to the confusion by pushing a specific system.
As I understand it, system vs system factions contributed to the
failure of the Ontario and 2nd BC electoral reform referenda. <br>
<br>
Teaching people basic STV and MMP is plenty to start with.
Getting tangled up in the weeds isn't good.<br>
<br>
It is fine for the Committee to take submissions on systems, but
the ERRE Committee has some idea of what is being talked about. <br>
<br>
By pushing a specific system, FVC stops being a lobby group for
ordinary Canadians and starts being a lobby group for FVC.<br>
<br>
Much as I dislike your Rural Urban thing, I will suffer with it if
it is ultimately chosen (tho it replaces Mr Dion's P3 as my own
pick for worst PR). The poiny is <b>this is not the time for
arguing specific systems</b>. This is the time for educating
Canadians, this is the time for arguing the need to implement PR
during THIS administration.<br>
<br>
Because if we don't get PR this time, I very much doubt we will
get it at all. <br>
<br>
If you still don't understand why I see pushing your Urban-Rural
system as having a serious potential to derail the chance of
actually getting PR , please go watch
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<h1 class="watch-title-container" style="margin: 0px; padding:
0px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; font-size: 20px;
vertical-align: top; width: 618px; line-height: normal;
word-wrap: break-word; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Roboto,
arial, sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal;
letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span id="eow-title"
class="watch-title" dir="ltr" title="Proportional
Representation vs. Alternative Vote" style="margin: 0px;
padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 20px; background:
transparent;">Proportional Representation vs. Alternative Vote<br>
</span></h1>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu31U5fogzU&index=2&list=PL66aOelRZ1qsEgqfd2BbE1CLL7EeDTCZ7">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu31U5fogzU&index=2&list=PL66aOelRZ1qsEgqfd2BbE1CLL7EeDTCZ7</a><br>
<br>
You don't have to watch the whole thing again, skip ahead to the
audience questions where 2 people waylay the discussion by getting
into the nitty gritty of the pet systems they developed. Most of
the audience was not remotely keen to go there (nor was the panel)
and that was an audience that has some idea what is being talked
about. Even if they hadn't going in, Dennis Pilon explained it
all nicely, so to start those folks would have been better off
than the average Canadian who is listening and certainly confused
by all this. <br>
<br>
It took me a couple of years before I understood PR well enough to
talk about it; even then, it took another year before I discovered
AV was the same as IRV. (And another couple of years before I
twigged to the act American electoral reformers lump IRV & STV
together as Ranked Choice Voting... being able to use Cambridge's
STV results to make AV city results look more diverse). <br>
<br>
Step away from your hobby horse, get out of the weeds and push for
PR. There are too many people actively working to stall, delay,
derail and generally make sure no meaningful electoral reform
happens without Fair Vote muddying the water further. <br>
<br>
Bob tells me Fair Vote Waterloo is spending a pile of cash to
bring Mr. Kingsley in. Presumably to push his new system. While
I get that electoral reformers and political junkies may get a
tingle at bringing in such a guest, frankly I doubt very much that
the wider public will have a jot of interest. <br>
<br>
In light of everything else I've said above, you'll understand I
might think this is not only a waste, but a detriment to what I
want, which is getting PR.<br>
<br>
The worst is the fact you've scheduled this event to compete with
(and this undermine) one of FVCwrc's own Public Library
presentations. I get that Waterloo Region Libraries only serve
the rural population, I mean who cares about New Hamburg? Well, I
have to tell you, the New Hamburg Election Debate was the only
debate where Conservative MP Harold Albrecht had to face an angry
constituency. You know, he's the only Waterloo Region MP who is
NOT holding his own town hall or lifting a finger to inform his
constituents. <br>
<br>
So, how many Fair Vote folk are going to go to New Hamburg to help
deliver the Make Every Vote Count message when they can instead be
political groupies at the Kingsley event instead? <br>
<br>
If you still don't get what I am saying, maybe this Winnipeg Free
Press article will help:<br>
<br>
<a
href="http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/debate-over-electoral-reform-about-values-391834921.html"><b>Debate
over electoral reform about values </b><br>
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/debate-over-electoral-reform-about-values-391834921.html</a><br>
<br>
I'm wondering if Fair Vote needs to figure out what it really
wants.<br>
<br>
I know I want PR. <br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Laurel Russwurm<br>
<br>
PS: I am not looking for an argument here. I've said my piece;
Fair Vote can ignore it or not.</div>
</body>
</html>