Don’t let de­tails de­lay vote re­forms

The Guardian (Charlottetown) - - EDITORIAL -

In re­sponse to Alan Hol­man's col­umn on July 4, there are a lot of vot­ing sys­tems we could try which would be fairer and less dis­torted than what we have now.

If we tried one and didn't like it we could re­fine or change it pretty easily. If we get bogged down in the de­tails, we'll never get any­thing off the ground at all. In the end, se­ri­ous-minded peo­ple have to pick some­thing broadly work­able that won't nec­es­sar­ily sat­isfy ev­ery­one, and run with it.

The Lib­er­als have an in­cen­tive to play ball - based on history, it is a vir­tual guar­an­tee they will hold on to a sig­nif­i­cant share of the pop­u­lar vote in the next elec­tion but be shut out of seats.

What about a four multi-mem­ber dis­tricts with a party list for each dis­trict? That's straight PR, but ev­ery lo­cal­ity is rep­re­sented. Stephen DeGrace, Stratford

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.