I read your guest column in favour of proportional representation with interest.
I certainly agree with the writer that “too many people have opted out of democracy by not voting.” I have some trouble following his logic; however, when he states that proportional representation “will mean we will have the ability to elect governments that are more accountable to voters and MLAs who will put people ahead of party interests.”
Let me explain my concern with a local example using the Green Party. The Greens have never come close to electing a candidate in Vernon-Monashee, in fact, the riding is considered to be a safe Liberal seat as are most of the other Okanagan ridings. Let’s assume that under proportional representation the Greens get enough votes in all the Okanagan ridings to entitle them to a member. Who gets to go to Victoria as the Green representing the entire Okanagan? Does it have to be someone who actually ran as a Green in one of the ridings? Can the Green Party appoint someone else?
Whatever the case, the choice actually is a Green Party choice since no Green was actually elected in any given Okanagan riding. That, it seems to me, makes that Green appointee more beholden to the Green Party than it does to the voters of the Okanagan. What do you think? Am I just too dumb to grasp how this proportional system makes a party appointee, to quote the guest columnist “more accountable to voters”?
Jim Bodkin