Editor:
The upcoming referendum on electoral reform is a sham. No referendum making major quasi-constitutional changes should set a 50 per cent plus one threshold with no minimum participation rate. There should have been an extended public debate between two independent, properly funded, well-publicized advocacy groups leading to a straightforward yes or no vote on an unambiguous question. Instead it’s an overly complex two-step vote that casts obscurity and confusion. The second step is a choice of three proportional representation (PR) systems, two of which have never been tried anywhere. There are many missing details on what would be implemented – we’re asked to trust the government to decide later. Trust the government …
We’re guinea pigs in a dangerous experiment. Whether it’s an experimental class for “new math” or live chemical warfare experimentation (two I’m familiar with), these things rarely turn out well. Yet we are again embarking on a badly designed, reckless experiment that puts our democracy at risk. It’s a confidence trick designed to preserve a shaky political alliance – the sort of manipulation we’d expect from a banana republic, not an advanced democracy.
Few of those preaching the Pollyanna evangelism of PR have ever experienced it. I have – I lived 16 years in Belgium and their democratic deficiencies under PR are serious. PR empowers fringe and one-issue parties, makes for compromised governments that can’t make difficult decisions and gives rise to a self-serving political class trying to claw their way up the party candidate ladder.
Canada consistently rates in the top 10 countries in the widely respected Democracy Index. The others in the top 10 are mainly low-population monocultures where reaching a wide consensus is much easier than in diverse and multicultural Canada. Canada’s democracy is deeply rooted, well functioning and strong. It isn’t broken and it doesn’t need fixing. Vote No.
Keith Maxwell, Sechelt
