Re: 鈥淪econd vote raises mistrust,鈥� column, Oct. 23.
The columnist seems to imply that the legislation to add a vote in the future on whether to retain a new voting system is an attempt to get a Yes result in the upcoming referendum.
However, if the columnist had checked, he would have found this is exactly what New Zealand did when it ushered in a proportional representation voting system.
In 1996, New Zealanders went to the polls for the first time using the mixed member proportional representation system.
In 2011, New Zealanders were asked in a referendum if they wished to keep the MMP system and 80 per cent said yes.
Rather than using a ploy to massage a Yes vote in sa国际传媒, Attorney General David Eby perhaps is allowing voters to determine whether or not to keep the new voting system in the future with a fixed date. Isn鈥檛 this what democracy should look like?
Phil Le Good
Cobble Hill
