Editor:
In the B.C. government’s online survey on “How We Vote,” the range of choices regarding the “most important values to us voters” is somewhat confusing. In particular, proportional representation scenarios seem complex and potentially more costly.
That said, my preference is for proportional representation, but to be more cost-effective than creating a bunch of new MLAs to match the share of votes cast province-wide in an election, why not this scenario?
Let’s say that Greens get 20 per cent of the province-wide vote, but have only two elected MLAs sitting in the legislature. Those two Green MLA seats/votes should have the weight of, and count for, 20 per cent of the electorate on any piece of legislation. They should also get 20 per cent of time allotted to speak on these bills. Correspondingly, if the party that gets 40 per cent of the province-wide vote receives, say, 80 per cent of the seats, their MLAs should be allowed only one-half of a vote each.
In the case where Greens may get 20 per cent of the vote but don’t win any seat, then the Green Party itself should appoint one member of its party to represent them in the legislature and that MLA’s vote would count for 20 per cent. Maybe a good cut-off point for party status could be 10 or 15 per cent of a province-wide vote.
All votes should be free votes to ensure that all sides’ views are acknowledged, including individual ridings’ views. This would encourage more cooperation and compromise, which is something unheard of in first-past-the-post systems. Hopefully this would result in less political posturing and theatrics, and a more thoughtful, policy-focused way of governing that better represents the will of the people.
Fraser McArter, Sechelt
