LETTER – What if the system keeps putting minority in charge of majority?

Mr. Anderson, interim leader of the BC Conservatives, is staying out of the electoral reform debate because he feels the issue should be non-partisan. He’s right. This is about democracy.

What is democracy? The simple answer is one person, one vote, majority rules. But what if the system you use keeps putting a minority in charge of the majority? What if for some regions it’s actually one person 1.1 votes? Would you feel the system was broken? That’s the broken system we have now under FPTP.

All of the ProRep alternatives keep the 1.1 votes per person for the interior. They try to fix the problem of having a minority govern over the majority (40% of the vote gets 100% of the power). They also try to prevent another wrong winner scenario. In 1996 the NDP won a majority government with fewer votes than the Liberals. Is your commitment to democracy to say that you don’t care if the system is unfair, as long as it’s always unfair in your favor?

Democracy means that sometimes you lose. Democracy is also about listening to all sides before voting. It’s not meant to be a hammer to punish your enemies. We are working hard to fix a broken system. It’s old and fragile and mere hundreds of votes can completely change the course of the government.

Quebec has proved that FPTP is little better than a coin toss at determining the outcome of an election (37.7% = 100% of the power). Help us fix the system before we have another wrong winner. Let’s change the system to bring stability to our voting process.


About Mel Rothenburger (6629 Articles) is a forum about Kamloops and the world. It has more than one million views. Mel Rothenburger is the former Editor of The Daily News in Kamloops, B.C. (retiring in 2012), and past mayor of Kamloops (1999-2005). At he is the publisher, editor, news editor, city editor, reporter, webmaster, and just about anything else you can think of. He is grateful for the contributions of several local columnists. This blog doesn't require a subscription but gratefully accepts donations to help defray costs.

4 Comments on LETTER – What if the system keeps putting minority in charge of majority?

  1. Tony Brumell // November 19, 2018 at 2:45 PM // Reply

    Thanks Grant ..Well said
    how about one person equals one vote and consensus rules.This is closer to Pro Rep than anything else other than full “Non partisan Gov’t”
    Under Pro Rep there will be more “free “votes and free votes mean consensus.If free votes become common people (Voters ) will start to realise that MLA’s can be independant.(Like most city gov’t and Territorial gov’ts.When all MLA’s are independant you have non partisan gov’t where consensus rules.

  2. Ian M MacKenzie // November 19, 2018 at 10:13 AM // Reply

    It’s pretty clear that the “3 member rump caucus”, as Ken describes the Green party, should have party status because they deserved 15 seats by popular vote. 12 of those seats were denied them by the unfairly valued and weighted votes for the two tent parties. And as for his inference they hold 100% of the power, well that is just wrong! If it were true the present government would not have continued construction of Site C nor would it be attracting the LNG industry.

  3. Ken McClelland // November 19, 2018 at 4:40 AM // Reply

    In BC we currently have a 3 member rump caucus that shouldn’t even have party status with, effectively, 100% of the power. That would be a familiar scenario under PR. Careful what you wish for. 2 months plus and counting, still no government in much-vaunted Sweden.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: