How to make electoral reform a success in B.C.
Alex Hemingway imparts four referendum lessons.
The NDP and Green party have committed to a referendum on electoral reform in B.C. This is great news, as it is high time we ditch our outdated first-past-the-post system for a better, more-representative alternative.
We have already had two referendum votes in B.C. in the past 12 years. The proposed B.C.-STV electoral system received 58 per cent support in a 2005 vote, but wasn’t implemented. And only 39 per cent supported change when a second vote was held in 2009.
So, what might enhance the chances of a “yes” vote? There is much to learn from B.C.’s previous attempts at reform, as well as from Ontario’s experience with a similar unsuccessful referendum on switching from first-past-the-post to a form of proportional representation called mixed-member proportional, or MMP.
An extensive analysis of voter attitudes was conducted during the B.C. and Ontario referendums by political scientists who looked at a range of factors that influenced whether voters supported or opposed electoral reform. I want to highlight four.
First, one of the strongest predictors of support in B.C. was trust in an innovative process called a Citizens’ Assembly, a randomly selected group of citizens from across the province tasked with recommending a new system. In the 2005 vote, the researchers found “voters said yes if they knew the Citizens’ Assembly was made up of ordinary folks and not stacked with government-appointed elites.”
If B.C.’s new government wants to see an electoral reform vote succeed, it should keep the design of the proposed new voting system out of politicians’ hands. One worthwhile option is to entrust the design of a system to a new B.C. Citizens’ Assembly or another process that is similarly credible and independent of political elites. Another option is to again vote on B.C.STV on a 50 per cent plus one basis.
Second, a key finding from these previous referendums is the more voters knew about electoral reform, the more likely they were to support it. However, levels of knowledge about the proposed systems, as well as about the Citizens’ Assembly process, were quite low in all three referendums.
There is obviously room for improvement, and the new government can assist by ensuring more resources for public education, discussion and debate on electoral reform this time around.
Third, a very likely consequence of moving to proportional representation in B.C. will be more frequent minority and coalition governments. In the previous referendums, political scientists found the more favourably voters viewed coalition governments, the more they came to support electoral reform.
The new government will certainly need to positively demonstrate how well minorities can work in practice if they want to increase the likelihood of a “yes” vote.
Fourth, not all proportional representation systems are created equal. There are so many possible variants it can make your head spin. For example, MMP systems alone come in different varieties. One sees a portion of the legislative seats (usually half ) elected in local districts just as they are today in B.C., and the other half are drawn from party lists.
In the “open list” version of MMP, voters get to rank the candidates on lists provided by the parties. In the “closed list” version, parties alone decide the rankings of their candidates.
In Ontario, political scientists found the more Ontario voters knew about the closed list feature on offer, the less likely they were to support electoral reform.
Electoral reform duds like closed lists should simply be avoided in B.C.
A lot of things will need to go right to get a more democratic voting system in B.C., and a rushed effort that fails to heed these lessons risks wasting a rare window of opportunity.
Reform advocates and the new government should seize this chance to help spark a successful discussion among British Columbians about deepening democracy in this province.
Keep the design of the proposed new voting system out of politicians’ hands