I’ve long advocated for electoral reform. Being in B.C., I have of course been able to take part in two referendums on the issue, neither of which came to be, because they asked the entirely wrong question.
The question shouldn’t be: “Do you want such and such a system, or to keep first past the post,” but instead should be: “Do you want to keep first past the post, or have a referendum to select from two or three options for electoral reform?”
A two-stage referendum would seal the end of the old two-party system of first past the post, and real democracy would begin.
At the federal level, we see that first past the post creates issues. The Green Party is unable to gain seats, despite having close to seven per cent of the votes. One million Canadians are deprived from having any representation in Parliament. And by the same token, a party is able to get false majority of the seats with as little as 38 or 39 per cent of the popular vote.
Even if you remove the Bloc from the equation, there’s still 51 per cent of those not supporting Harper versus 39 per cent that do. Another false majority. Even remove the Green Party, and you still are left with a false majority.
Harper and his Republican strategists are trying to get the undecided voter to stay at home. There’s good reason why – he can win a few close seats if people do not show up. Proof of this is evident in 2008, where we had the lowest voter turn out since confederation began. (about 59 per cent)
Harper is counting on you not to vote. I’d like you to disappoint him, and show up.
Why should a minority of Canadians get to determine $90 billion worth of stupid spending priorities?
Keith Hebert
