To the editor:

On October 10th, Ontarians will vote for representatives to a new provincial parliament, but also in a referendum on the current “First Past The Post” system (FPTP).

The device currently used for electing members to the legislature is a plurality system with single member constituencies. Winning candidates simply gain more votes than any other candidate on a single count. This need not be an absolute majority of the votes cast in a constituency.

Under the proposed arrangement, Ontario would be divided into 90 electoral districts instead of 107. These members would be elected under the FPTP system. Another 39 MPPs would be appointed at large. The result would be a proportional representation system (PR), which has already been rejected by voters in BC and PEI. Ontario calls this arrangement Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)

The advantage of FPTP is that majority governments are usually produced, whereas under MMP, a minority government would usually be the case. Under FPTP, constituents directly elect their representatives, who have a hands-on knowledge of the constituency. Under the proposed MMP, 30% of the candidates would be appointed to the legislature based on lists of candidates provided by the various political parties and the proportion of the total vote each party received in the election. Two classes of MPP are therefore produced, those elected and those appointed. It is possible that an appointed MPP could be selected as a cabinet minister or even Premier. The smaller parties, such as the NDP and Green, like MMP because it allows them more legislative decision making than under FPTP. These fringe parties complain that they do not receive proper representation under FPTP, however, all they need do is modify their extreme views and move closer to the centre of the political spectrum where most Ontarians are located. If they were to do that, the seats would come to them, but they dream of perching on the edge and at the same time influence provincial affairs with their extreme policies.

On paper, MMP seems like a good idea, but it would produce far more problems than any faults of the current system:

Ø Almost certainly a minority government situation in every election, thus producing watered down legislation. Sometimes a majority is required to pass needed legislation for the common good after full and open debate.
Ø Policy would be decided after the election as parties horse-trade for seats and support.
Ø MPPs with full voting rights would be appointed who are not accountable to anyone other than their party leader.
Ø In minority legislatures, accommodations need to be made to the minor parties by the government in order to pass legislation. MMP would have the effect of greater fiscal expenditure and therefore higher taxes to facilitate it.
Ø Proportional representation has proved to bring instability to two countries, Israel and Italy and gridlock to another, Germany.
Ø Once Ontario has MMP, there is no way back to FPTP, since the controlling minor parties in the minority government would defeat any such effort.

The real complaint of the minor parties revolves around their inability to gain enough seats to govern. MMP would grant them undeserved legislative influence and the ability to paralyze legislation until their demands are met.

John Merriam
Berwick N.S.

This entry was posted on Sunday, September 16th, 2007 at 6:55 pm and is filed under Canadian Politics, Letters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.