Ontario: MMP R.I.P., Climate Change Ignored During Election

BlogThis!

As you probably know by now, the Mixed member proportional (MMP) electoral reform proposal has been soundly defeated in Ontario. At the time of this writing, the interim referendum results stand at First-past-the-post (the current electoral system) 63.3%, MMP 36.7%. Prof. Dennis Pilon, an MMP supporter, told the Globe & Mail that Elections Ontario's pre-referendum education campaign had been "an unmitigated disaster". The sad part is that election results like the ones below will continue to happen. And not coincidentally, issues like climate change will continue to be ignored.

As of this writing, the 2007 Ontario Election results look like this:

Liberals: 42% of votes = 70 seats

P.C.: 31% of votes = 26 seats

N.D.P.: 17% of votes = 11 seats

Green: 8% of votes = 0 seats

Others: 1% of votes = 0 seats

I want all those hours in Math class back: my teachers were obviously wrong about how numbers work!

Anyway, now we get to watch the usual charade: the Liberals will form a so-called "strong majority government" -- despite having a minority of the votes. The P.C. and N.D.P. will be weak opposition parties despite having more votes between them than the Liberals.

I know, there would have been no chance of a coalition between the N.D.P. and P.C. -- but what if the positions of the P.C. and Liberals had been reversed? A Liberal-N.D.P. coalition could have happened under MMP. Under the current system, though, the P.C. would have formed a "strong majority government" and shut them out. Yes, with only 42% of the vote vs. a combined 48% for the other parties. Oh, wait, this sort of thing has already happened! In 1995, we got the notorious anti-environment Harris P.C. government -- despite the Liberals and N.D.P. getting many more combined popular votes than the P.C. (Citizen's Assembly chart).

The Greens' 8% vote in 2007 gave them the same number of seats as the Others got with only 1% -- a big, fat zero! Despite the Greens' recent momentum, pundits like Prof. Nelson Wiseman are already predicting that with the MMP's defeat, the Greens would sink back to being a marginal party.

In other news, the Toronto Star's Tyler Hamilton notes that "Climate [change] went AWOL during this election". Despite the fact that many voters were interested, the major parties decided to skirt the issue. The Greens were the only ones who raised it consistently.

While I still disagree with the Greens on one plank of their climate change platform (carbon taxes), I agree with most of their other policies on climate change and other issues. Unfortunately, even if the Greens get some people elected under the current system, they would have no more influence than today's N.D.P. So long as the larger parties get fake "majorities" most of the time, smaller parties are shut out of policy-making even if they make it to the Legislature.

Alas for real democracy. And alas for issues like climate change.

[Important Notice]

Discuss this on your own Blogger blog! Click on the post's title for a permalink in the Address Bar > highlight any text for quoting > click BlogThis!

Ontario Green Party Still Best for Environment Overall?

BlogThis!

In my last blog post, I said that I supported many parts of the Green Party of Ontario platform, but I was critical of one of their central themes, shifting taxes from income to carbon. Today, a coalition of major environmental groups has, in effect, given the Green Party the highest overall score on a large number of environmental issues. The NDP were very close behind, though. And the Liberals were a close third -- but the Tories (er, Progressive, ahem, Conservatives) were so far behind that they barely even registered (Toronto Star story -- original coalition report).

The coalition unfortunately did not seem to ask about many economic policies that relate to environmental issues. What about pollution taxes, cap-and-trade, road subsidies and support for car-makers? Among other things, the report did nothing to reduce my unease with the Green Party's carbon tax plan.

Still, it's great to see that three out of the four parties are moving so close to the green side of many issues. The Green Party can probably take credit for keeping the topic on the agenda and goading other parties along. But this means that Ontario voters who care about the environment can now put more weight on other factors. I would still suggest looking at the parties' general social and economic policies.

[UPDATE September 28, 2007: speaking of social policies, I agree with Michelle Mann's view that on the issue of school funding,

"...the only party that has it right is the Greens, whose leader, Frank de Jong, supports moving to one publicly-funded school system."

Mann says that this would be constitutional, as proven by Manitoba, Newfoundland and Quebec. (See the above link for the legal mechanism.)

Sure fixing the general school funding formula is important, as the NDP's Howard Hampton keeps saying, but why waste any of of the added funds on duplication of services? Mann suggests that removing the duplication would save a lot of money that

"...could be directed to funding for autistic students, accessible post-secondary education and revitalizing a flailing public education system."

I would add that there could also be more funds for environmental education and energy-efficiency school retrofits.

Deciding which party to support is not easy, given the sheer number of issues and policy options on offer. That's another reason why I would love to have MMP. With two votes, one for local/party candidate, and one for party list, I could express my wishes views more accurately. I could in effect support two parties if both of them have good ideas.]

[Important Notice]

Discuss this on your own Blogger blog! Click on the post's title for a permalink in the Address Bar > highlight any text for quoting > click BlogThis!

"Ontario: The new frontier for alternative energy"?

To balance out the sceptical view linked in my previous post, here's a more sunny view:

Ontario: The new frontier for alternative energy | News.com to go | CNET News.com

Optimism, the final frontier :-)

[Important Notice]

McGuinty's Climate Change "Plan rests on technology, cash" - TheStar.com - sciencetech

Here's a good summary of the trouble with McGuinty's Climate Change Plan (besides missing the Kyoto deadline by a couple of years): TheStar.com - sciencetech - Plan rests on technology, cash

I will try to provide a more detailed analysis when I have more time.

[Important Notice]

Electric Cars and Other Green Tech - Government of Ontario, Canada Sees the Light

Apparently, a public talking-to by Al Gore, plus an impending election, have sharpened the mind of Ontario Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty. He is now promising to lift the ridiculous ban on Neighbourhood Electric Vehicles (NEV) such as the ones being made by Ontario-based ZENN Motor Co. McGuinty also promises big money to attract electric car manufacturers and other green technology makers to Ontario, Canada, starting with ZENN (now being assembled in Quebec), and on to GM's proposed Chevy Volt (currently rumoured to go to GM's Cobalt assembly plant in Ohio, USA).

The carrot, according to the Toronto Star:

"Grants from the five-year, $650 million fund will be available to both carmakers and other types of manufacturers, sources say.
"These include generators of clean energy, such as solar and wind power, and makers of cleaner fuels, among other products.
"The fund is a cornerstone of McGuinty's platform for the Oct. 10 provincial election.
"'I'll be saying to Detroit and I'll be saying to Japan ... let's partner and let's make them cleaner than they've ever been made before,' McGuinty said yesterday at a meeting of the Toronto Star editorial board. 'We know there are global markets to be exploited here.'"

Better late than never, I suppose. In McGuinty's case, though, "late" has had a tendency to turn to "later and later". The delays in his promised closing of Ontario's coal power plants, from 2007 to 2009 and then 2014, are notorious by now (see "The Trouble with Coal" sidebar story in the Toronto Star -- scroll down on the right side of this page).

Even this late in the game, though, McGuinty could have chosen to run on a better record instead of on promises. The quote from the NDP at the end of this article suggests that McGuinty may have been able to pass many of his "green" measures -- had he chosen to send them to the Legislature instead of to the Press:

"New Democrat MPP Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth) said McGuinty's plan is electioneering that 'falls short on credibility' because it's based on his twice-broken promise to close coal plants.

"'There's an election coming. I think that's why you're seeing it today. If he's serious, if this is just not an election promise, recall the Legislature, put the measures before the Legislature and let's vote on them,' said Tabuns" [emphasis added].

Realistically, what happens after the election is what will count. Perhaps one day we would actually catch up to the innovative spirit in places like Ontario, California.

[Important Notice]