Electoral reform is needed, but not like this

Aug 31, 2007

There has been considerable debate over the pros and cons of the proposed mixed member proportional (MMP) electoral system proposed for Ontario. For those of us living in rural areas, this should be a topic of great interest.

We must already live with local representatives who are spread far too thinly over a ridiculously large area, and this attempt at electoral reform will further reduce the number of ridings in the province by 17. Rural residents should sit up and take notice anytime someone talks about reducing the number of ridings. We tend to bear the brunt of it.

Of course, the proposal adds 39 members chosen according to their
parties’ share of the vote. What it doesn’t specify is where they will come from. They could conceivably shift the balance of representation even further in favour of Toronto and the rest of urban Ontario. Indeed, the odds favour that outcome.

What we end up with is less representation while at the same time paying for 22 more politicians. How is that going to help anything?

What is perhaps most troubling about the MMP system proposed for Ontario is that it takes us even further in the wrong direction – making the party more important and the local representative more irrelevant. This is already happening. When we go to the polls, do we vote for the local name, or do we vote for the party and its leader? Do we know what our local candidates stand for, or do they just recite the party line? When they go to Queen’s Park, do they vote according to the wishes of their constituents, or do they obey their leaders? Our system is based on local ridings sending representation to the legislature, but are they our representatives, or are they just bums in seats?

Let’s face it, our MPPs are whipped.

MMP takes this a step further by electing 39 MPPs by party, taken from prioritized lists prepared by the parties themselves. Not only does this virtually guarantee high-ranking members of major parties a seat without accountability to any local constituency, it also provides an incentive for other members to toe the party line in hopes of gaining the same undefeatable status.

Not to say that parties don’t already reward loyal ridings by booting out their local candidate and parachuting in a party bigwig in need of an easy win, but this will just make it worse.

And what do we gain? A couple of the fringe parties might finally make it into the legislature, with either too little influence to accomplish anything, or in a situation where a small minority hold the balance of power. At best, we end up with a handful of MPPs who campaigned on limited platforms dragging a few pet issues into every debate, regardless of relevance.

Our electoral system needs to change, but this is not the answer. We need to
take a better look at the spirit of our present system, and decide how we can make it work that way in practice. We must remember that we are not electing parties or leaders, we are electing representatives. If the system is to be reformed, it must be done in a way that allows or even requires them to be our representatives. The legislature needs to function as a collection of many local MPPs instead of a few parties.

If the mixed member proportional proposal comes to pass, our local representation could erode even further than it already has, and this is something we should speak out about.

We need representation, not a bum in a seat.

A.C.