The most unfortunate aspect of the whole debate over proportional representation is that we are not really discussing how to improve the way government operates.
Many of the proponents for PR, for example, rail against the dictatorial nature of our present system and how it gives all of the power to just one party. Yet they seem to be perfectly content, if not condescendingly so, to point out voters don't need to know how it will work. We will let the politicians dictate that to us after we have voted.
One recent letter pointed out you don't need to know how a car works in order to drive it. True. But it does help to know a little bit about how a car works so you can distinguish running out of gas from a complete engine failure.
And yes, you have to trust a mechanic when they tell you there is a problem - just as we will have to trust politicians regardless of the outcome. But a lack of trust in politicians seems to be the central theme of several letters in favour of switching our voting system.
We have seen people writing about the "corruption" in our political system and the undue "influence" of corporations. Other writers claim politicians operate at the behest of the rich.
Not any politicians I know. Indeed, I am trying to remember when we last had a corruption scandal in this province. And most of the politicians I have met are willing to listen to good ideas, regardless of where they originate - and not listen to bad ideas, even if they come from very rich people. But I don't know every politician in B.C.
The real question we should be asking is how does proportional representation change any of this?
A PR system has a much lower threshold to power than FPTP. Invariably, as rightly pointed out, our political parties do not capture more than 50 per cent of the vote. That means any government formed will likely be some form of coalition. Imagine a scenario where a party has 48 per cent of the seats in the house and a minor player has five per cent. The governing party with 48 per cent requires that five per cent to get its legislation past. The minor player can bring down the government at any time.
Who has the power in this relationship? Or, perhaps more accurately, who has the power in our present legislature? It is the minor party. They can collapse the government and force an election any time there is a vote of confidence. There is nothing the major parties can do about it.
This is why the opponents of proportional representation have railed against fringe parties. The advertising has been inappropriate and definitely over-the-top but a multitude of voices in the legislature will lead to instability. It will also always lead to compromise and that can deadlock the government from taking action.
Perhaps the most amusing aspect of the "pro-PR" discussion is the contention we can "always change back" after two elections. Really?
The legislation enabling this - Bill 40 - Electoral Reform Referendum 2018 Amendment Act - was tabled Oct. 2 and has only passed first reading. Given the timeline between now and the end of the session, it is possible it will die on the order table.
However, even if it is passed, it is not binding on the next government. It is legislation and can be amended or even removed at the will of the governing parties.
If you had just been elected to government by a PR system and would be unlikely to be in government if there is a switch back to FPTP, would you be in support of holding another referendum?
I think not.
Of course, there are a number of proponents of PR who would say "yes, absolutely." But it does mean trusting our politicians to do things which are not necessarily in their best interest.
Which brings us back to the point - the feeling expressed by a number of letter writers over the past two months is "we don't trust our politicians." So how are things going to be different?
I would have preferred to spend the last 18 months having a discussion about what is wrong with our present democracy. What needs to be fixed and why? Is it just apathy? Or is it a strong sense all politicians are corrupt? Or that money controls the system?
If we had spent the time trying to understand the real issues, maybe we could have worked towards fixing the problems instead of putting on a band aid and hoping things will be better. Proportional representation won't make things better. Just have a look at the democracies which use it now. They are no better off than we are.
