Just another way to count ‘em

The BC-STV proposal, to be voted on by the public in a referendum May 17, doesn’t address the problem

by Jason Scott

It’s almost provincial election time and dozens of people are gearing up for what promises to be a lukewarm turnout. What makes this election noteworthy is that citizens will not only be voting for the candidate they can stand. Voters will also have the option of endorsing a new electoral system in BC, as recommended by the Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform—a process which is set to be repeated, in some form, throughout Canada. 

What makes this remarkable is the fact that hardly anyone cares. 

It was somewhat promising when the BC provincial government organized The Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform (CAER), supposedly to address problems with the electoral system and restore people’s faith in politics. On the surface it seemed like a brave undertaking: appointing a group of random citizens to review, and recommend changes to, the way politicians are elected in BC. Never mind that the Assembly was a follow-through on a campaign promise made by Gordon Campbell after the Liberals lost an election that they may have won under a different electoral system. Still, it seemed like a glimmer of hope. After all, there’s no reason to expect a politician to follow through on a campaign promise.

At first it appeared that there was some possibility of this process leading to real changes in BC politics, a chance for citizens to become involved in their governance. Here was a chance for citizens to address some of the reasons keeping them from participating in elections: irresponsible government, lack of accountability, and division between MLAs and constituents. However, it was soon made clear that, due to the limited scope of the assembly and the information provided, the CAER was not going to result in any fundamental changes to the way politicians are elected and do their jobs. 

To begin with, the pool from which the “random” citizens were chosen for the Citizen’s Assembly was limited to only registered voters, meaning that those who weren’t registered to vote, the most disenfranchised group, were conveniently excluded from the process from the start.

Furthermore, the Terms of Reference demonstrate the limited scope of the CAER. For instance, the latitude of the CAER was “limited to the manner by which voters' ballots are translated into seats in the Legislative Assembly” and had to “take into account the potential effect of its recommended model on the system of government in British Columbia.”

The next indication of a flawed process was the manner in which alternatives were presented to the participants. The process started out with a series of “learning sessions” in which selected speakers presented selected information to the Citizen’s Assembly.

This phase consisted of the summarization of the alternatives the CA would be expected to consider. This “Learning Phase” looked at the electoral systems in use by countries with very similar forms of government as Canada and countries which suffer fundamentally the same political shortcomings as Canada and which are experiencing comparable drops in voter turnout. Instead of considering any real changes to address the concerns of voters, the Citizen’s Assembly was presented decidedly un-revolutionary alternatives consisting of other failing systems in use around the world, such as plurality, majority, proportional representation, single transferable vote, and mixed systems.

Although there are many complicated superficial variations within these systems, basically what they amount to is different ways of tallying votes. This brings us to why people don’t care.

British Columbians and Canadians in general are avoiding the polls not because they don’t like the way votes are counted. My neighbors are not saying “Gee, I’d really feel good about politicians if only we a had a system where my vote would be counted slightly differently, making the seats a party acquires more indicative of the popular vote.” No, Canadians are not voting because of what politicians are doing, or not doing, for the four years after the election. People don’t vote because they know that, regardless of who they vote for, their influence on matters of public policy and governmental decisions still equals zero. Canadians are not voting because their “representatives” are in no way accountable to the people who are forced to pay them.  

Although this process of “electoral reform” may have some short-term effect on voter disgust due to the illusion of inclusion, voters will soon see that nothing meaningful will come of it. In order for Canadians to return to the polls they will have to be given real opportunities to participate in the decisions that affect them, their families, and communities. This could be achieved through something as simple as requiring elected officials to represent their constituents in parliament, which, would be truly revolutionary.

Envision if you will such a system, wherein elected representatives are required to vote in parliament according to the wishes of the constituency, rather than the wishes of political parties and the groups who control them. With today’s technology it is possible that citizens in each riding could decide how they want to vote on a bill before parliament and instruct their elected official to act accordingly. Under this radical system people would have a say in how their country and their lives are run. Sounds crazy, but the concept isn’t entirely new. The Greeks actually dreamed up such a system thousands of years ago. 

They called it democracy.

****