Re: 鈥淧roportional representation breeds instability,鈥� comment, Sept.聽20.
sa国际传媒 voters elect a legislature to govern and represent us. We also want to be able to measure their performance, and this is best achieved by the current method of election 鈥� first past the post.
The commentary points out that a mixed-member proportional representation method results in a coalition 95 per cent of the time. FPTP means that we, the voters, elect 100 per cent of the MLAs, while under PR, the political parties could pick about 40聽per cent of the MLAs.
In coalition governments, the minor parties often demand cabinet posts for their support. A good example of this can be found in New Zealand, where a party with 7.2 per cent of the votes had no members elected directly by the people, but had nine appointed by the party. They negotiated for four cabinet posts, plus the deputy prime minister.
I did not vote for the NDP, but in the next election, if Premier John Horgan and his party perform well, I would far rather see them have a majority NDP government than be part of endless coalitions where instability is the norm. It also becomes very difficult for voters to measure the performance of a government that is made up of three or more parties, which is also the norm of PR. Remember there are 18 registered political parties in sa国际传媒 that could run candidates in the next election.
I will be voting no to PR systems.
Doug Blair
Cobble Hill
