Electoral reform is not warranted

Re: “B.C. faces challenges in electoral reform,” comment, Aug. 15.

Acknowledging challenges in attempts to replace our present first-past-the-post electoral system, and noting “success in a referendum seems doubtful,” Norman Ruff nevertheless continues to promote electoral “reform.” Change would be a better descriptor.

Most voters realize that the major benefit of our system is that it is the best bet for stable, broadly based secular government.

The disadvantage faced by third or fragmented minority parties under FPTP in many cases cause the system to move to a party of the “left” and a party of the “right.” Third parties tend to wither away and almost never reach a level of popular support above which their total vote yields a comparable percentage of seats in the legislature. That’s an accurate description of the current seat allocation within our provincial legislature.

The “seat bonuses” for the largest party common under FPTP (e.g. where one party wins 45 per cent of the vote but 55 per cent of the seats) means that coalition governments are the exception rather than the rule. The normal results usually enable cabinets that are not limited by the restraints of having to bargain with a minority coalition partner. The inherently unstable and unusual governmental status we in B.C. currently have with a minute minority governing coalition partner is not justification for adoption of one of the multiple versions of proportional representation.

Electoral reform is neither warranted nor wanted. Let’s stay with the system that’s served us so well for so long.

Ron Johnson Saanich