FPTV ep. 8: Electoral Reform - Majority Whim vs. Reason

It is expected that, on May 15, 2007, Ontario's Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform will recommend replacing Ontario's Single Member Plurality (SMP or "First Past the Post") electoral system with the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system. If it does so, Ontario will hold a referendum on October 10, 2007, to decide whether or not to replace Ontario's SMP system with the MMP system.

The key difference between the two electoral systems is that the SMP tends to yield single-party majority governments, whereas the MMP tends to create minority governments.

In this episode of FPTV, Freedom Party of Ontario leader Paul McKeever explains to Ontario's Select Committee on Electoral Reform that minority governments exclude the possibility of rational and exclude ethics from the law-making process. Only a majority government, submits McKeever, allows a government to make laws according to what is right rather than just according to what is merely popular.

NOTE: the Select Committee was comprised of elected members of the provincial legislature and held its hearings in 2005. On the basis of its report, the government set up Ontario's Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• electoral
• reform

[lonewolf1369]

you're wrong when you consider personal choices. Fact is, libertarianism, idea that we should do what we want as long as it doesn't hurt others, is the best idea. This party is the most libertarian and therefore the most ethical. All the others want forced taxation, drug bans, monopoly services, nanny state..

[Shular67]

I find it funny that I disagree with his reasoning, but not necessarily with his initial premise. I believe that a majority government IS more effective than a coalition of minorities, but not because of some "whim vs ethics" argument. It's simply that each party has its own agenda, and a lesser party can hold a coalition hostage by refusing to compromise. And since the two biggest parties would never work together, the power ends up in the hands of the third (i.e. NDP).

[Slorrin]

He seems to define "ethical" goverment as 'a small minority imposing its will on the majority, with no accountability" but "emotional mob rule" governemnts as 'governments where multiple viewpoints are considered and people must compromise their stances to strike a balance"... he's like george bush.. he labels things the EXACT opposite of what they are.

[democracyisdead]

why isn't there a 3rd option on the ballet stating "none of the above"????

The problem isn't the reps, it's the policies. I think it took McGuinty 2 days in office before he stated he would not honour his promises.

This referendum an illusion of choice.

Direct Democracy enables the population to hold representatives accountable for their actions.

Provocateur cops, officials failing to investigate, a senate that won't investigate?

This bullshit reform is a distraction.

5to1 - fuckin A

[jasondiceman]

He assumes a coalition would not be ethical, but human ethics is a common bond between all people that crosses party politics.

Reason is a subjective judgment.

Negotiation is required when we live in a pluralistic society.

I don't trust this guy at all.

-jd

[PaulMcKeever]

A whim is a want that need not be consistent with what nature demands of a person who seeks to live and be happy. Majority rule is not a replacement for a commitment to the facts of reality and to logic.

[PaulMcKeever]

Processes aren't rational: thoughts are. Open-ness and transparency are not a guage of ethical conduct: rationality is.

[amoureuxdefleur]

Youre presumption that will of the majority is a "whim" isn't supportable. Why is it a "whim"? I'll need to hear more than becasue you say so. I say the opposite, based on 11 years of first-hand experience of MMP.

[amoureuxdefleur]

I've lived under MMP in New Zealand for the past 11 years and I'm satisfied that you're wrong in your presumption that minorit governments can't be "rational". Each party brings to the table its values and goals and the governance rendered is basd on what they have in common. It is a very rational process and ethically, it is superior in so far as the process is more open and transparent that one-party caucus negotiations, which are usually hidden.

[PaulMcKeever]

The fact is that the MMP makes single-party majority governments the rare exception. Government by consensus - which is the essence of minority government - is NEVER government by rational thought. Majority whim is not evidence of rationality and, given the political programmes proposed by most political parties in Ontario, majority whim would most certainly lead to irrational government policy.