BC-STV: "The Choice"
Top Comments
All Comments (22)
-
Not only is the Israeli political landscape vastly different from BCs, but the voting system is as well - we could expect a total of three parties in an STV Legislature under current circumstances. Italy isnt a great example of instability if you consider that the same party was at the centre of those coalitions, but again the context is different. Consider that while most democracies in the world use PR, only Israel and Italy seem to come up repeatedly as examples of fractured politics.
-
Certainly MLAs will always listen to you, but whether they can act is another issue. With an end to majority governments formed with a minority of votes, the likelihood that voters will have a local MLA they can identify with who also has some power increases immeasurably. Coalition and minority governments work fine, and centrist legislation is a desirable end. Take examples like Germany or New Zealand, for instance: stable and functioning coalition and minority governments exist worldwide.
-
Ive seen the ridings: theyre amalgamations of the current ones and elect the same number of representatives with the same number of voters, so theyre fine in my book. Also consider that the northern ridings resemble the federal ones, except that there would be multiple members representing those regions in our Legislature, same as now.
-
TV doesn't mean a more equitable government It's a way to make certain no governing body has the ability to have a simple majority. From now on they will be minority an coalition governments. Look to countries like Isreal and Italy.. how do coalitions work. It's simple they don't. Watering down, not powering up is what the STV does for your vote.
-
Under this you are going to have 20 Mega ridings as opposed to 82 throughout the province. Where do you think the majority of those seats will come from. The lower mainland , south Island and the okanagan not where other British Columbian reside. Have you actually looked at the size of some of these riding areas. Certainly if you voted NDP and the liberal candidate won under FPTP you might feel that they may or may not listen to you. You're a tax payer a BC Resident. Talk they have to listen.
-
Our current system is downright ancient, so this is a pretty silly argument. STV will provide a local political representative for people who currently lack one, and that's the main selling point for me. Often the majority of people in a riding have not voted for the winning candidate, and these people lack a local representative who will stand up for their beliefs in the legislature. STV solves this problem through multi-member ridings.
-
BC STV is portraying the STV as a "New" systyem of voting.
Look to history:
The concept of transferable voting was first proposed by Thomas Wright Hill in 1821. The system remained unused in real elections until 1855, when Carl Andræ proposed a transferable vote system for elections in Denmark.
How does a system of voting that was first devised in the 1800's remain current in today's world.
STV makes larger voting areas only 20 within the province rather than 82 areas..
Just a Bad Idea.!
-
When I think about it STV (singe transferable vote) makes more sense than FPP (first past the post).
-
Thanks to Premier Campbell's electoral reform initiative, we now have the opportunity to cast off our antiquated, winner-take-all method of electing MLAs. On May 12th, vote for BC-STV.
-
We need PR elections in this country.
Sweet! Donated today to help get air time.
vorshlumpf 2 years ago 7
The current system is for unelected backroom boys; BC-STV is for the people of British Columbia.
skinnydipper2008 2 years ago 7