If it ain’t broke...

C come and gone but it is a reminder of the great country we live in. And what a great province British Columbia is. Perfect? No. Not by a long shot. There are still many issues which we need to address – such as finally resolving issues associated with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and coming to terms with the balance between economic development and environmental sustainability.

- fluent lives in a spectacular part of the world. Canadians have annual wages worldwide depending upon how you calculate the number. We have an abundance of resources – both natural and human.

We have a lot to be thankful for and, in part, it is due to our relatively stable form of government at all levels. Yet some people feel there is a need for change.

I have been talking to a number of people about proportional of change, the general response is something along the lines of making every vote count. Something like “how is it fair that a party only

There are a number of answers to this but the simple reality is whatever party forms the government essentially will get all the power regardless of what percentage of the vote they receive. Proportional representation doesn’t change that dynamic.

Consider our present structure. - gan is premier despite receiving less than the BC Liberals, albeit by leader Andrew Weaver has essen per cent of the population who voted for him have had their votes coopted into the coalition. Without having a say in the matter.

Change the seat allocations to be closer to the percentages afforded by the popular vote and nothing changes. The NDP would still be the dominant partner and in government. It would be their policies the government would enact and the only power Weaver could wield is the threat of bringing down the government with a non-confidence motion.

“But having proportional representation means the parties must cooperate and come to some form of consensus,” say the PR proponents.

No. It doesn’t ensure anything of the sort. It all depends on the agreement crafted by the leaders after the election.

form of power or some important measures in the coalition government. To get their particular interest on the agenda, they will need to sell out the rest of their principles and their supporters.

These negotiations are carried out behind closed doors without public oversight or access. No one will know just what their vote was sold for or what was on the table in the negotiations. Somehow, for the proponents of PR, this is a more fair and open system.

There are lots of countries which use some form of proportional representation. It is easy to find examples of manipulation and side dealings, of special interest groups hijacking the agenda, and of internal discord and dissent amongst the governments of these such as Norway, which are held up as exemplars of just how well proportional representation works.

In Norway, the government does not hold a majority of the seats and the party in power did not win the popular vote. But they were able to build a coalition of the likeminded so as to stay in power. So much for being a fairer system.

The other common complaint I hear is people don’t like the Single the provincial government’s survey on the voting system indicated they didn’t like the voting system. didn’t feel like their vote counted.

of respondents did not answer this question which allowed respondents to indicate more than one answer. People generally don’t respond to questions on surveys when the question does not make sense to them. In this case the question was “Which, if any, of the following have been barriers that have kept you from voting?”

- cates the vast majority of British Columbians are presently satisfied with all aspects of our voting sys analysis of the results indicate particularly among people who vote regularly. Despite all of the talk about proportional representation, the majority of British Columbians are happy with the way things are and don’t see a need for change.

But ultimately, the referendum will answer the question.