Proportional Representation in Ontario

This Entry:
Date: 2007-09-15
Time: 10:42
Comments: 1



Return To:
Recent Entries

Elsewhere:
Category Selector

Search:
Archive:
 • Aug 2008 (2)
 • Jul 2008 (2)
 • Jun 2008 (4)
 • Apr 2008 (2)
 • Mar 2008 (2)
 • Feb 2008 (2)
 • Jan 2008 (4)
 • Dec 2007 (2)
 • Nov 2007 (4)
 • Oct 2007 (1)
 • Sep 2007 (6)
 • Aug 2007 (4)
 • Jul 2007 (3)
 • Jun 2007 (2)
 • May 2007 (2)
 • Apr 2007 (4)
 • Mar 2007 (2)
 • Feb 2007 (4)
 • Jan 2007 (4)
 • Dec 2006 (4)
 • Nov 2006 (24)
 • Oct 2006 (3)
 • Sep 2006 (1)
 • Aug 2006 (2)
 • Jul 2006 (3)
 • Jun 2006 (6)
 • May 2006 (5)
 • Apr 2006 (5)
 • Mar 2006 (1)
 • Feb 2006 (8)
 • Jan 2006 (11)
 • Dec 2005 (8)
 • Nov 2005 (12)
 • Oct 2005 (10)
 • Sep 2005 (18)
 • Aug 2005 (8)
 • Jul 2005 (10)
 • Jun 2005 (14)
 • May 2005 (8)
 • Apr 2005 (10)
 • Mar 2005 (14)
 • Feb 2005 (12)
 • Jan 2005 (12)
 • Dec 2004 (9)
 • Nov 2004 (18)
 • Oct 2004 (13)
 • Sep 2004 (12)
 • Aug 2004 (16)
 • Jul 2004 (6)
 • Jun 2004 (10)
 • May 2004 (8)
 • Apr 2004 (8)
 • Mar 2004 (27)
 • Feb 2004 (19)
 • Jan 2004 (8)
 • Dec 2003 (10)
 • Nov 2003 (18)
Random Entry

Others:
 • Jen
 • Keltie
 • On LiveJournal

Proportional Representation in Ontario

If you read people’s opinions about proportional representation in Ontario then you will very quickly find people arguing about whether it is democratic to vote blindly for a list of people, not knowing who or how many will get into power. They say that the list people will be beholden only to the party, and will not be accountable.

People in this debate are ignoring that we have a party system in Parliament in Ontario, and all the nitpicking about details is missing the big point. The party system will NOT change here, and once any MPP gets to Queen’s Park they will vote with their party almost always.

In our current “First Past the Post” (FPTP) system, the truth is that the “list” concept is here already. It’s called “who the parties are running in each riding”. Once people are elected they have to do what the party tells them to. The vast majority of people are casting a vote for the party, not the candidate. And even those who cast a vote for the candidate are truly casting a vote for the party in terms of where government decision making comes from once if they get to Queen’s Park. Once elected, all MPs VOTE WITH THEIR PARTY.

The proposed “Mixed Member Proportional” (MMP) system doesn’t stop you from considering a local person, you still do that, but it puts control of the party system into the people’s hands, whereas before the party was this murky thing that hijacked power in Parliament. It does this by putting in more MPs from a pre-defined, pre-ordered list, who then VOTE WITH THEIR PARTY.

Anyone who believes they are being disenfranchised by losing local candidates to list candidates is ignoring the fact that individual MPPs do not make decisions in parliament based on their local constituency. They ignore the fact that FPTP is the artificial reason that 40% of the public can elect a premier who makes all the decisions, and if that is not disenfranchisement then I don’t know what is.

A large number of ordinary people studied this to death and found MMP is better. I think it is too, so MMP has my vote.

Pledge to vote and learn more:

return to cmh blog Opinion › political     2007-09-15 10:42   ...1
The "Why" of MMP

The key thing missing from the official information campaign is WHY the Citizens Assembly recommended MMP. With no "why", people trying to make sense of it are ending up very confused. They have no idea what the information that is being provided actually means.

The government says it wants to be neutral, so removed the"why" from EO's mandate....which is a damned odd thing to do if you're being neutral.

To me, "neutra" would have seen the government stand back and pass the recommendation on to voters for their appraisal. Instead, we have the government effectvely suppressing the reasons their own deliberative body recommended MMP....and asking voters to make a call on the subject in the resulting vaccuum.

That isn't neutral. It's a strategy to defend the status quo. They know very well that more the people know about MMP, the more they will like it. So they aren't letting them know.

The OCA knew..and voted 94 to 8 in favour of MMP.

at 2007-9-15 17:21 by Linuxluver
Add your comment...

your name Help stop spammers: prove you're human! 
    Three plus three is: (learn more
subject/title
comment





All content © 2003-2005 by Colin Henein. All rights reserved.
People & Places CMH Science & Nature Opinion Arts & Literature Sports & Leisure