A few thoughts on electoral reform
Re: Here’s Why We Need Electoral Reform, Andrew Coyne, Jan. 14. Our present electoral process “ghettoizes representation in regional lines,” as Andrew Coyne puts it, because our ridings are defined based on geographical regions and because we elect representatives, as opposed to parties, to ensure that the interests of our ridings are actually raised in Ottawa. Of course, we could assign voters randomly to ridings, in which case there would be little or no common interest left for MPs to represent. Or, we could allow voters to assign themselves to ridings based on what they believe to be their common interests. In this case, political parties wishing to retain the confidence of the House would have to pay attention to the things that all voters think are important. Imagine that.
Patrick Cowan, Toronto. Andrew Coyne appears to be very concerned about providing equity in our voting system, so that all votes will count equally in an election. However, proportional representation is just as likely to lead to an inequitable result as first-past-thepost. Single- issue parties tend to proliferate under proportional representation and a party that might expect to garner only two per cent of the vote nationally, and would probably gain no seats at all under first-past-the-post, could claim six or seven seats under proportional representation. Such a party could well be the kingmaker in a closely contested election, which would result in the government accommodating its platform. Two per cent of the voters would therefore be driving the government agenda, which is hardly equitable.
No system of voting is equitable under all circumstances. But opinion polls suggest that what most voters want is a system that is simple and transparent, that provides strong, stable governments and lets voters choose who will represent them in Parliament. First-past-the-post, for all its faults, does this. Voters as a whole generally recognize this, which is why this system is unlikely to be replaced in an unbiased referendum.
Roger Graves, North Gower, Ont. Andrew Coyne repeats the popular fiction that a vote for a candidate who doesn’t win is “wasted.” As someone who has never missed a vote — and rarely voted for a winner — I believe this view does a disservice to our representative system. Winning candidates represent everybody in their riding, not just those who voted for them. And exercising our incredible privilege to vote is never a “waste.”
Claire Hoy, Toronto.