The fact of the matter is, the referendum isn't about choosing whether or not we should move to mixed member proportional (MMP); it's about choosing to remain on the first-past-the-post or moving to mixed member proportional.
The advocates of the current system will tell you the real solution is to fix the current system and not to change, but somehow in the same breath argue that the system has worked well unchanged for a couple of hundred years.
The advocates of the current system will tell you they support electoral reform but that the real solution is to find a different electoral system other than MMP, but somehow fail to explain why we haven't explored a different electoral system for a couple of hundred years.
The fact of the matter is, the advocates of the current system want to remain on first-past-the-post. What they don't want you to know, however, is the truth about first-past-the-post.
- First past the post is only the electoral choice of 8 countries of the world. Some of those countries use proportional representation, too. Most of the other countries that currently use FPTP inherited it from their colonial power.
- Under first past the post, governments in Ontario have reduced the representation in Ontario.
- Under first past the post, political parties determine who and what you vote for.
- Under first past the post, elections are like a box of chocolates - you never know what you're going to get. You could get a minority electing a majority, the second place party forming a majority, or the complete elimination of any political opposition. The worst part of all of this is that these situations are the norm.
- First past the post lets parties exploit the weaknesses of the system to their advantage. It's no longer necessary to campaign on policy. As long as you can scare your opponent's traditional voters away, it's not necessary to achieve a majority of votes or to form a consensus with someone else. You just need one more vote than your opponent.
Updated: Reworked the wording of the last paragraph.
4 comments:
Please note the following sections of the referendum law:
Section 1:
“referendum advertising” means advertising in any broadcast, print, electronic or other medium that,
(a) has the purpose of promoting a particular result in the referendum, and
(b) appears during the referendum period,
Section 17:
(2) No person or entity shall arrange for or consent to referendum advertising that appears during the blackout period. O. Reg. 211/07, s. 17 (2).
(3) No broadcaster or publisher shall allow a referendum advertisement to appear during the blackout period. O. Reg. 211/07, s. 17 (3).
Oh brother
We have a concerted effort by Aaron and the No side to shut down free speech. Are you writing a letter to the Toronto Star today as well, Aaron?
I am glad, Jim, that you have spent some time on the issue because it's important. FPTP is undemocratic and needs to be scrapped.
From Scott's site:
Update to last post about actually blogging on MMP today
Now, the EO official did stress to me they reserve the right to investigate other blogs on a case-by-case basis if something is brought to their attention, but the basic point to all of this was that as long as the blog you are running is of a personal nature, EO has no problem with you blogging on the MMP topic - its a form of free expression. If you’re getting paid to blog by a particular side and doing the blogging however, that isn’t so fine.
Post a Comment