Monday, May 11, 2009


Some friends of mine are really gung ho about the Single Transferable Vote proposal that British Columbians will be voting on tomorrow.

I am not too sure about the concept.

The conservative in me doesn't like the idea of radically changing a voting system which already seems to be working just fine.

The libertarian in me says instead of focussing on new ways to elect government we should be concentrating on ways to dismantle it.

The political part of me is worried STV will mean endless socialist/green coalition governments.

And no part of me understands how this convoluted system actually works.


West Coast Teddi said...

go to and give it a go

Peter L said...

I hope it gets voted down but in BC one never knows. There isn't much dumber than BC politics. If there's a way to make things trendier, more PC, more whacko, it'll be done in BC. Unfortunately we have no choice in BC politics. Either we have a guy who disregards election promises and platform once in power or a party that will bankrupt the province.

Anonymous said...

STV was rejected in the last election.

I am in total agreement with Gerry's thoughts on the STV.

Scott Merrithew said...

What is missing from all discussions I have seen about the BC STV plan are references to Proportional Representation. The (intentionally??) misleading title of STV seems conveniently designed to attract support from people who see practical benefits to a single transferable vote ballot. After all, we have been using that system for years at party leadership conferences, because it avoids time-consuming multiple ballots, and more importantly, by voting first choice, second choice, third choice, it results in a single candidate indicated by a majority of voters. Even if I don't get my first choice, I won't be too unhappy if I get my second choice.

But STV is not really what is wrong with the BC plan. PR is what is wrong.

Most people, conservatives in particular, recognize the administrative fiasco that will result from a PR election process, let alone the lame-duck government that will inevitably follow. But even people who would vote NO for PR, may be deceived into voting YES for STV.

It may be too late now, but more attention should be directed to highlight the fact that this is just PR in sheeps clothing.