Letter to the Editor

Re: MLA Report, Doug Clovechok

I have just read Mr. Doug Clovechok’s report on the electoral reform referendum and I’ve just seen the ads that the ‘No’ side has put out. I’m shocked that a MLA and a party would tell such blatant lies about the reform. When they are not telling lies, they are misleading the public.

They are trying to spread FUD around; fear, uncertainty and doubt. These are the same tactics used by the NO side in the 2005 and 2009 referendums on BCSTV.

Mr. Clovechok (Columbia River-Revelstoke MLA) has obviously had some coaching in the BC Liberal’s talking points, because the same misinformation and lies are spread by all the anti-electoral reform gang.

Given this kind of behaviour, how can voters trust them with the reins of power in Victoria? They are so desperate to get back the power that they lost in 2017 that they will lower themselves to the level of perjury.

The NO side asks you to ignore the following:

That it is scared to death of moving to PR because they feel they will lose their stacked deck and their hold on power and they will do anything they can to defeat electoral reform.

The 80+ OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development) countries that use some form of proportional representation.

That of the top 10 OECD countries by GDP/capita, that use proportional representation, Canada is not on the list.

That your MLA is not going to represent you in the legislature if your concern is contrary to his/her party’s policy. Of 8,000 votes in the legislature, there were only five times when an MLA voted against her/his party.

That under proportional representation, every one will most likely have an MLA that is aligned with their interests.

That under the first-past-the-post (FPTP), 50% of votes don’t go to elect an MLA, whereas in Scandinavian countries, using PR, over 90% of votes go to electing someone.

That FPTP distorts the will of the voters, with a party gaining government with only 40% of the vote, leaving the other 60% out in the cold.

That FPTP leads to a Balkanization of the province, with large blocks being represented by only one party.

That on election day with FPTP, if you are in a “safe” seat, represented by someone other than your party, you might as well stay home, as your vote will not count.

That on election day, with proportional representation, if your choice of candidate has no chance of being elected, you don’t have to hold your nose and vote for someone else to prevent your least favourite candidate from being elected.

With first-past-the-post, you get what we see from the BC Liberals and their moneyed supporters, in this referendum campaign, a win-at-all-costs scenario, even if it means leaving ethics at the door.

That if B.C. chooses PR, after two election cycles, there will be anther referendum asking voters if they want to keep PR or go back to FPTP.

Daryl Sturdy,

Vancouver

Article Share