Based on personal experience, it seemed like the people whom I talked to that didn’t want to vote for STV either a) Didn’t know what STV is or b) misunderstood how STV worked
I wouldn’t vote for something/someone I didn’t know. I still think STV has a chance once the word really gets out.
Is there a moderator in the building? Split this topic please.
I think you raise a great point. If we had continued building Spirit class boats instead of Pacificats we would probably be exporting them to Germany.
the fast cats were the wrong ship for BC, the board of directors originally wanted to rent out a Incat ferry to see if they would work in BC, but the NDP Government didn’t like that so they fired the board which were made up of business ppl and appointed a board that mostly didn’t have business experience, and they heeded the province’s wishes and went ahead with the fast cats and lo and behold they were the wrong ships for BC when the were built, heck all they had to do was look at washington state who built fast ferries and they were duds too. as for the current ferries the new BC ferries board asked for tenders in BC and around the world, the criteria was built on time, on budget and guarantee of the ships for x amount of years, and guess what our shipyards wouldn’t even give the basic guarantees about on time and budget.
Which is why there will be no electoral reform in the foreseeable future!
Exactly. How we elect our MLAs is pretty much etched in stone. However, are there other reforms that are worth pursuing.
I am bothered by the fact that a government with less than 50% of the electorate can rule with 100% power. And on some isssues they may only have 60% support from the people who attend conventions and vote on policy. As well, they may not have 50% support on certain issues from the people who actually voted for them. In other words, some policy/laws are being enacted that have a very small support level. (And that is not even considering the almost 50% who didn’t vote).
So here is a random thought.
What if each riding had a council of some sort say of seven people. Totally partisan. Made up of people selected by the political parties but based on the proportion of the vote within the riding. For the North Coast, we would have four from the NDP, 2.5 from the Liberals and .5 from the Green. In our case we would need eight people (4, 3, 1) but if a vote took place the fractions would be used.
The role of this group would be to inform the public and gain information from the public as important legislation occurred. Maybe four times a year (budget, throne speech, a contentious issue), the group would hold a public forum where they would present their parties position on the issues and take back to their parties the issues that the public has brought up.
There may even be times when the government or the opposition would be allowed to ask for a mini (non-binding) referendum on an issue. These councils would be the voters. Because there is proportionality in these councils, the vote will not always go the way of the MLA. In fact you might see votes that cross party lines. Government could choose to ignore an opposing vote or try to find common ground to gain more public support.
The advantages are a more informed electorate who may be more likely to vote, more informed MLAs who will have a clearer understanding of the people in the riding, and a more informed government about public sentiment.
I haven’t thought this all the way through, but are there other ideas out there that might solve the flaws of our electoral system without actually changing the way we vote. The end result of a more informed publc and a more responsive government is what really matters.