As an old-timer who has been voting in U.K. and Canadian elections since the 1950s, I breathed a huge sigh of relief as the decisive result of the sa国际传媒 referendum on our electoral system was announced. What a triumph for common sense.
The first-past-the-post system has stood the test of time. It has underpinned the great reforming governments of the mature democracies of Britain and North America. When voters can elect a party having the wherewithal to govern, and reserve the right to periodically kick out an outfit failing in its mandate or outliving its usefulness, it鈥檚 the best guarantee of stable government.
Importantly, FPTP elects representatives accountable to people in specific constituencies and conscious of local concerns.
Allegedly, the advantage of PR lies in the allocation of seats to parties based on their total support, regardless of performance. But this is merely a sop to fringe organizations, a sort of losers鈥� charter. Worse still, individual representation might be sacrificed to party representation, as small parties could make up their allocation of parliamentary seats from faceless party lists. PR is also a proven recipe for minority governments, resulting in inaction, fringe-party blackmail or measures spawned from the expediency and cynicism of backroom deals.
Finally, PR can be so mathematically complex as to confuse or simply drain the interest from the election process. If it鈥檚 a mathematician鈥檚 delight, it鈥檚 a nightmare for the political pragmatist.
J.G. Lover
Oak Bay
