Referendum? What referendum? About 50% of Ontarians polled don't know about it. If you don't know about it, read up on it. It's rather significant.
Nearly half of Ontarians say they know nothing about a proposal to change the way the province elects its politicians, but those who do know about it are likely to support it, according to a new poll.
The referendum, to be held in conjunction with the Oct. 10 provincial election, will ask voters if they want to replace the existing first-past-the-post system for electing legislators with a new system known as mixed-member proportional (MMP).
With less than three weeks to go, 47 per cent of those polled said they knew nothing at all about the proposal. Only 12 per cent said they knew a lot.
With less than three weeks to go, 47 per cent of those polled said they knew nothing at all about the proposal. Only 12 per cent said they knew a lot.
THE PROS AND CONS OF EACH OPTION
THE EXISTING SYSTEM
Under Ontario's first-past-the-post system, each person casts a ballot for a candidate in his or her riding and the candidate who receives the most votes wins. The political party that wins the most ridings forms the government.
Strengths: The system often produces stable majority governments, and provides communities with strong local representation in a large and diverse province.
Weaknesses: The legislature does not always reflect the way Ontarians voted and a majority government only rarely wins a majority of the votes. The 2003 election is a case in point: the Liberals swept to power, winning 72 of the 103 ridings, but won only 46.5 per cent of the votes.
THE PROPOSED SYSTEM
Ontarians would cast two separate ballots vote under the mixed-member proportional system - MMP, for short - one for a local candidate in each of 90 expanded ridings across the province, and one for a political party. In addition to the 90 local MPPs, another 39 "list members" would come from lists of candidates chosen by political parties. If 40 per cent of the votes were cast for a particular political party, for example, that party would get 40 per cent of the seats. If a political party didn't have enough local members elected to match its share of the vote, it would be awarded additional seats from the 39 held by nominated members. The party with the largest numbers of seats would form the government.
Strengths: The number of seats held by a political party would roughly equal its share of the total votes for that party. Smaller parties could also gain seats, helping them emerge as a political force.
Weaknesses: The system could produce uncertainty as political rivals with opposing views form governing coalitions. For example, Belgium, which adopted proportional representation in 1981 and has 33 political parties, has gone without a government for more than three months. Critics also say that, with the list members, political parties would be able to stack their caucuses with loyalists who have no direct responsibility to voters.
THE EXISTING SYSTEM
Under Ontario's first-past-the-post system, each person casts a ballot for a candidate in his or her riding and the candidate who receives the most votes wins. The political party that wins the most ridings forms the government.
Strengths: The system often produces stable majority governments, and provides communities with strong local representation in a large and diverse province.
Weaknesses: The legislature does not always reflect the way Ontarians voted and a majority government only rarely wins a majority of the votes. The 2003 election is a case in point: the Liberals swept to power, winning 72 of the 103 ridings, but won only 46.5 per cent of the votes.
THE PROPOSED SYSTEM
Ontarians would cast two separate ballots vote under the mixed-member proportional system - MMP, for short - one for a local candidate in each of 90 expanded ridings across the province, and one for a political party. In addition to the 90 local MPPs, another 39 "list members" would come from lists of candidates chosen by political parties. If 40 per cent of the votes were cast for a particular political party, for example, that party would get 40 per cent of the seats. If a political party didn't have enough local members elected to match its share of the vote, it would be awarded additional seats from the 39 held by nominated members. The party with the largest numbers of seats would form the government.
Strengths: The number of seats held by a political party would roughly equal its share of the total votes for that party. Smaller parties could also gain seats, helping them emerge as a political force.
Weaknesses: The system could produce uncertainty as political rivals with opposing views form governing coalitions. For example, Belgium, which adopted proportional representation in 1981 and has 33 political parties, has gone without a government for more than three months. Critics also say that, with the list members, political parties would be able to stack their caucuses with loyalists who have no direct responsibility to voters.
No comments:
Post a Comment