Two questions are the right answer for referendum
A two-part question, as proposed by Attorney General David Eby, is the best way to ask British Columbians about electoral reform in a fall referendum.
Eby revealed Tuesday he will recommend cabinet approve two referendum questions.
The first will ask British Columbians whether they prefer the current first-past-thepost system or a proportional voting system.
The second question, which matters only if the majority supports the PR option, would ask us to rank which PR systems we prefer.
That’s where things get tricky. As of right now, many people won’t have clue what these proposals mean.
We’ll be asked to rank three PR systems — dual-member proportional, mixed-member proportional and rural-urban PR.
How familiar are we with these systems? Well, this editorial writer knows about the MMP system, which is used effectively in Germany, for example, but I will need the other two explained to me.
Many other people will probably need one or all of the PR systems explained to them, too. A massive education campaign will be needed. A quick (sort of) summary: MMP: “Mixed-member proportional representation is a mixed electoral system in which voters get two votes: one to decide the representative for their single-seat constituency, and one for a political party. Seats in the legislature are filled firstly by the successful constituency candidates, and secondly, by party candidates based on the percentage of nationwide or region-wide votes that each party received.”
DMP: “Dual Member Proportional … is a proportional electoral system that was created by Sean Graham in 2013 with funding from the University of Alberta … With DMP, Canada’s current singlemember districts would be replaced with about half as many dual-member districts. All candidates would run in their local dual-member district, and voters would choose their preferred candidate or pair of candidates using a straightforward single-vote ballot. The first seat in every district would go to the local candidate with the most votes … The second seat is awarded to one of the remaining district candidates so that proportionality is achieved across the region.”
Rural-urban: According to Fair Vote Canada, this system would create multi-member seats in urban areas and singlemember seats in more sparsely populated regions, with regional “top-up” seats added to make the system more proportional.
OK, so we have a lot to learn. But we can do that.
We’re glad Eby rejected proposals from the NDP and Green caucuses to omit question 2 and leave it to “experts” to choose a system. This is too important an issue to leave to experts.
Voting would take place by mail Oct. 22-Nov. 30.
If we opt for PR, another referendum would be held after two elections to see if we want to keep the new system.
Currently, people who cast a vote for a losing candidate in their riding feel like their vote doesn’t count. PR will fix that, but it’s not as easy to understand as our current system.