Mr. Kyllo, you had me right up until the third last paragraph. I was totally convinced by everything you said about the dangers of buying into the prop-rep game, about the stalemates in the legislature, the endless discussions. I was thinking “wow, nobody has ever laid this out so succinctly before; I can totally see why this might be a bad idea.”
Then, as I read that third last paragraph, the momentum in your argument was suddenly arrested by the most incomprehensible baffle-gab that ever popped up in the middle of a letter. “If we considered the impact of a 24.3 per cent increase on expenses as a per cent of GDP in BC, we would see the government costs rise by more than $13 billion. Expect to see taxes on our provincial debt go up to accommodate that.”
I have to ask you, sir, from which of your many hats did you pull those figures? Why 24.3 per cent? Is that some formulaic certainty upon adopting prop-rep voting? What starting figure did you use to multiply by 24.3 per cent to arrive at $13,000,000,000? Is there any correlation between these numbers (presuming both that they are accurate and that they have some bearing on the issue) and prop-rep voting itself?
I would appreciate a response, via this medium, from my elected representative in Victoria. I and, I’m sure, others are all ears as we wait to hear this complicated situation properly explained. Thank you.
Mark Levey
