Build on election committee suggestions

Re: “PM’s flip makes a tough sell tougher,” column, Feb. 2. Les Leyne’s column on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s U-turn on electoral reform rankles. First, he suggests electoral reform means replacing “the entrenched system with something completely new and different,” and elsewhere, “this is a lot more complicated than it seemed.”

Had Trudeau built on recommendations the Electoral Reform Committee made to design a system that retains local representation and introduces some degree of proportional representation, the resulting system could be both simple and not-sodifferent.

We could continue to elect most of our MPs as we do now, with perhaps 300 constituencies where the candidate with the most votes wins (first-past-the-post) Then, to counter the frequently unequal distribution of seats relative to the national popular vote, we could have 50 more MPs elected at-large, based on each party’s share of the popular vote. A very simple way to add proportionality to our elections.

The new ballot is likewise simple. A person has two votes instead of just one. One vote would be for the person you want to represent you locally, and the other for the party you would like to represent your views if your preferred candidate doesn’t win locally.

You would still most likely have an MP (local or at-large) representing your interests. With a threshold of five or seven per cent to obtain a share of the at-large MPs, you would avoid fringe parties electing MPs.

A visionary leader could champion this improvement to our democracy, as it would be in the interests of all voters of every persuasion. Murray Gudmundson Victoria