B.C. faces big challenges in electoral reform

For starters, the referendum question is unformulated; PR system is undefined

The proportional-representation reform commitment made by the B.C. NDP and Greens for a referendum in October 2018 fulfils a key part of their May electoral mandate.

Our own history of reform failure in 2005 and 2009, and the parallel demise of PR proposals in Ontario, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec — not to mention the federal government’s abandonment of electoral-system reform — all point, however, to the formidable challenges faced by attempts to replace the first-past-the-post electoral status quo. Success in a referendum seems doubtful.

Much needs to be accomplished over the next 12 months. The referendum question is as yet unformulated. The PR system option is undefined.

The choice between a mixedmember proportional and single-transferable-vote systems that emerged from the B.C. Citizens’ Assembly likely remain the main alternatives.

Notwithstanding the 57.69 per cent support for STV in the first B.C. referendum, the opposition mounted in the 2009 referendum and gathered a 60.91 per cent vote against BC-STV.

Renewal of an STV option will be an uphill path. This time, a mixed-member proportional system — German/New Zealand style — that combines single-member first-past-the-post district votes with party-list proportional representation seems the preferable model.

The province is about to rejoin a far-ranging debate on democratic values and also enter a still more divisive and prolonged contest on the numbers and definition of new electoral districts required to implement a mixed-member electoral system.

There will be little appetite for an increase and still more resistance to reductions in the existing 87 single-member districts that would be required to accommodate the party-list component of MMP.

Much will depend on the persuasive powers of the B.C. NDP/Green reformers and their determination to persist in their commitment to reform.

There is no easy passage to MMP, but using a combination of our current federal ridings to elect 42 MLAs, plus a matching 42 regional proportional-representation party seats might offer several advantages over any attempts at an entirely cold start to the MMP option.

British Columbians would have two votes: One for their local MLA with first-past the-post, as now, and a second vote for their choice of party.

The latter would ground proportional representation by adding a share of party-list seats where a party’s proportion of the regional vote justified more representation.

A party in a Vancouver Island 14-seat region, for example, that elected three of seven MLAs but with 40 per cent of the total vote, would gain three list seats. (To discourage fringe parties, a provincewide five per cent vote threshold would limit access to the party-list allocation of seats.)

There would be a total of 84 MLAs, with regional party lists matching the number of federal districts within each region.

A tentative regional framework might, for example, encompass seven regions: Vancouver Island (14 seats), Vancouver (16 seats), North Interior (six seats), Fraser (12 seats), Fraser North (12 seats), Richmond-Surrey (12 seats) and Central Interior (12 seats).

Without underestimating the obstacles that might arise in further exploration of this option, it adds a practical focus to the issues and a good chance of beating the odds in adapting to proportional representation.