Voting systems risky, expert warns
Two of three options in electoral referendum have never Been used
VICTORIA One of the experts consulted by the NDP on proportional representation says he can’t understand why the government picked two obscure voting systems for the referendum, and warned voters deserve to see clear maps showing how the proposals will work in the real world.
Peter Loewen, director of the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy and Governance, said B.C. is taking a risk in the November referendum.
“What’s curious about the choice of system is two of the three have not been put in place, according to the report, in any other jurisdictions,” Loewen said Thursday. “So they are asking citizens to make British Columbia a site of huge experimentation in an electoral system.”
Loewen was one of four experts in democratic reform the government asked to review a draft questionnaire on voting systems in late 2017. He did not endorse the final questionnaire, nor was he consulted on the selection of voting systems. The resulting public feedback from the questionnaire went to Attorney General David Eby.
That feedback didn’t show a consensus on the type of voting systems, so Eby selected the three proposals released Wednesday.
Eby also selected the rules for the mail-in ballot.
The three electoral system options include:
dual member proportional, which would involve large twoMLA districts where one is elected based on the most votes and the other by their party’s provincewide performance;
mixed member proportional (MMP), where 60 per cent of the province’s MLAs would be elected by most votes and 40 per cent by lists set by political parties;
and rural-urban proportional representation, a mash-up between MMP for rural ridings and single transferable vote for urban ridings.
The dual member and ruralurban systems are untested.
“I haven’t heard of them,” said Loewen, a leading authority on electoral reform who has co-written a book on the topic.
“What they’ve tried to do is rightfully come up with systems that are trying to strike the line between proportionality and local representation, but in doing that and trying to come up with choice, they’ve somehow decided to take a flyer with two systems nobody has ever heard of before,” he added.
Loewen said he also thinks the government should have put the single transferable vote on the ballot because it was recommended by an independent citizen’s assembly in 2004 — even though it was twice rejected by B.C. voters in referendums in 2005 and 2009.
The NDP government’s handling of the proportional representation referendum formed part of an emergency debate at the legislature Thursday.
Opposition Liberal Leader Andrew Wilkinson attacked Premier John Horgan for government’s continued refusal to provide maps that would show how the various options in the referendum could change B.C.’s 87 electoral ridings. The proposals could result in significantly larger ridings.
“What’s really going on is an attempt to blow it past the people of B.C. by sucking them in to picking one of three options that nobody really understands,” said Wilkinson. “This is a way to keep the NDP and Greens in power indefinitely.”
The attorney general’s ministry said it believes it would take an independent boundary commission 18 to 24 months to map out the three proposals. Elections B.C., charged with providing non-partisan information during the referendum, said it doesn’t have the mandate under law to create maps, nor is there enough information about the proposals to do so.
Horgan said he thinks the public votes mainly by candidate and is less concerned about knowing their riding.
“This notion every British Columbian wants to have a map before they make a decision is distorting the reality of people’s lives,” he said Thursday. Loewen disagreed.
“It’s a problem, voters have a right to know what the details of things are going to be,” he said, citing court rulings that allow a plus or minus 25 per cent population variance on ridings. “The way you draw the maps matters.”
Thursday’s emergency debate also set the battle lines on proportional representation the parties intend to take into the summer barbecue circuit now that the legislature has adjourned until September.
Horgan said he believes in the public’s ability to research electoral systems over the next six months. Education Minister Rob Fleming used the emergency debate to attack the Liberals for opposing change, arguing the firstpast-the-post system has benefited them with multiple electoral victories compared to the NDP.
“Judging by their instantaneous ridiculously negative reaction to the report yesterday, it’s sad that the B.C. Liberals have already closed their minds to the prospect of reforming our democracy and moving toward a more modern voting system,” said Fleming.
“But they’ve made it clear. They ’ve tied themselves to politics of naked self-interest and entitlement that for 16 years gave them 100 per cent of the unchecked power with a shade over 40 per cent of the vote.”
Prince George-Valemount Liberal MLA Shirley Bond criticized the government for refusing to take the time to explain how ridings might change in rural B.C.
“I represent a riding that is about 31,467 (sq.) kilometres or so, it is a provincial electoral district that is larger than Belgium, represented by a single MLA, and there are ridings in this house that are substantially larger than mine,” said Bond.
“I take the responsibility to represent my constituents very seriously. To serve them effectively, I need to know each and every one of my communities. I need to build relationships with communities, whether they have 50 people, 500 people or 75,000 people . ... To be told that there simply wasn’t enough time speaks volumes about the process and about the outcomes it will generate. It also reflects a basic lack of understanding about the things that matter to my constituents and many others in this province.”
Horgan reiterated what will likely be the government’s dominant argument in favour of change over the summer, which is that voters are smart enough to handle a question on whether they want to keep the current system or change to something else.
“If they choose a proportional representation system, they will know with absolute certainty that when they cast their ballot it will mean something in this legislature,” said Horgan. “It will mean something. It’s not a thrown away vote as it is now, after first past the post.”