To the editor,
I am truly appalled by the fear mongering and the nonsense put forward by the first-past-the-post supporters and their paid hacks. Proportional representation of any kind is the only route back to having democratic legislatures and parliaments.
Of course, those with party influence see this as a threat to their acquisition of wealth from the public trough but that’s all the more reason to vote for a prop rep system. Please vote to move to prop rep with the first question. Don’t worry about the second question. It’s only there to help people argue that it’s confusing. It’s not. Proportional representation is, however, democratic – which first-past-the-post can never be.
Brian Fisher, Nanaimo
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Proportional rep won’t allow for change when it’s needed
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers argue for electoral reform
To the editor,
Re: Readers argue for electoral reform, Letters, Nov. 8.
First-past-the-post electoral systems only work well when there is a choice between only two parties. When there are more, as in B.C., voters are forced to weigh the consequences of voting for a smaller party against allowing a much larger party whom they may dislike unfairly gaining advantage. The ability to freely choose whom to vote for without this fear of emboldening another party is what makes proportional representation fairer and encourages more voters to vote. For those who are fearful of change or unanswered questions (and there will always be some) the chance to re-evaluate will occur in two years. Those who think that proportional representation leads to radical politics only has to look south to see what chaos can occur with first past the post.
What is truly dangerous are uninformed voters, a supine media and hidden money.
Liz Fox, Lantzville
<hr width=”75%”>
The views and opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the writer and do not reflect the views of Black Press or the Nanaimo News Bulletin. If you have a different view, we encourage you to write to us or contribute to the discussion below.
