To the editor:
I have spent some time absorbing the letters to the editor on Prop Rep (I say that, because “Pro Rep” sounds biased). What I find interesting is the generally unsubstantiated claims of those in favour of Prop Rep which, when explored, are just that – claims without substance. Doubt this? Take a stroll through the internet. For example – the claim of improved voter turnout in New Zealand. True – for one year. Then right back to declining turnout after. Also, the claim that every vote will count. Well, folks – every vote counts right now. And the claim that since my candidate did not get in, I am not represented. Two points here: first, where do you get the idea that you will be any better represented under Prop Rep? And second: I have worked with members of both the government and the opposition and have always felt they honestly represented everyone in their constituency. I feel very comfortable we in B.C. are locally represented right now.
The final point I wish to bring to the table at this time is the attitude of some pro Prop Rep people I have read. They run down the FPTP people through name calling, plus saying that people who are for FPTP do not have integrity. Further they say all that is written about FPTP is bunk; bullying nonsense; repulsive. With no additional factual information which can be substantiated as to why Prop Rep is better. Back up your claims in a factual manner, please!
I will vote for the system which has a track record; which offers substantiated facts and information (with resources which can be verified). Like FPTP (First Past The Post). To be frank, Prop Rep offers no maps, has been rushed, is based on unsubstantiated “trust me; we will take care of you” opinions. The Prop Rep choices being offered in B.C. are as unclear as the air in the Okanagan Valley, and as difficult to absorb and take.
Jim Edgson
Vernon
