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 - A Vote for MMP is a Vote Against CO2

BlogThis!

I've argued in this blog that voting for MMP in the October 10 Referendum would be good for the environment and climate change policy. Cameron Smith obviously agrees, for reasons that are complementary to mine. He writes in the Toronto Star that

"Right now, the most important environmental issue facing Ontario is whether proportional representation will be adopted. Voters in the Oct. 10 election will make the decision.

"The current system of voting delivers unequal representation, which inevitably distorts the wishes of the public. How else to explain why the government at Queen's Park has kept a weak minister in the environment portfolio while the public has made it clear that environmental deterioration is a top-of-the-mind concern?"

He says that this happens because

"The current [Ontario electoral] system breeds instability. It's a blood sport, where opposition parties focus more on gaining power than on good government, largely because they have little hand in creating policies and have no commitment to them.

"As a result, government policies often have a short life span. In the face of global warming, short-term, ever-changing policies are a recipe for disaster."

He argues among other things that

"...proportional representation will result in more minority governments and coalitions, which means responsibility for government policies would lie with more than one party." [Bolding added throughout.]

According to mark.greenan, there is evidence to back up this theory, presented by the eminent political scientist Arend Lijphart in his book, Patterns of Democracy:

"[Lijphart's] conclusions on environmental policies? Consensus democracies have lower carbon dioxide emissions, fertilizer consumption, deforestation and higher energy efficiency" [bolding added].

I take it that "consensus democracy" means that more than one party has to agree on policy, because governments are formed by coalition. That's more frequent under forms of Proportional Representation (like MMP) than under our current "first-past-the-post" or "winner take all" system. I would have to read the book to find out more.

General theories aside, as I've argued, MMP would probably mean Green Party members in the Legislature by 2011. No MMP would likely mean this Party being shut out again. The same applies to the federal Parliament and many other provincial Legislatures. This hard reality makes it critical for the the MMP side in Ontario to win -- and for similar reforms to prevail Canada-wide in the coming years.

[Important Notice]

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

Improve Democracy in Ontario -- On October 10, 2007, Support Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) Voting!

We interrupt the Climate Change posts for an important message: Ontarians have a unique opportunity to improve their democracy (and incidentally, help save the Planet, too). On Provincial Election Day, October 10, 2007, Ontarians can vote "YES" on a Referendum question to add Proportional Representation to the electoral system.

The traditional voting system (known as "first past the post") has resulted in too many minority Governments (in terms of popular support for the governing party) that call themselves "majorities" (because they end up with a majority of the seats in the Legislature). [UPDATE August 19, 2007: See charts of percent popular vote vs. percent seats in the Legislature in recent elections (citizensassembly.gov.on.ca "Resources" - links under "Electronic Press Kit" near bottom of page).] Moreover, smaller parties with a strong but spread-out support base can't get a seat in the Legislature (unless their supporters all move into one or a few ridings :-) This is deeply undemocratic, and it over-emphasizes local (even parochial) concerns over Province-wide (even Planet-wide) issues.

Speaking of Parties promoting Planet-wide issues, a recent poll has put the Green Party of Ontario at 11% support (sesresearch.com [PDF] via greenparty.on.ca). But this Party is very unlikely to get even one seat under the current system. If a recession hits and saving the planet returns to the back-burner for larger political parties (like it did in the 1990s), having the Green Party in the Legislature would help ensure that the issue does not vanish completely. For these reasons, a system that would give the Green party a voice would be a vast improvement for democracy -- and for the Planet.

A bit of background:

"After months of learning, consulting and deliberating, the province’s first Citizens’ Assembly decided to recommend a new electoral system for Ontario: Mixed Member Proportional [MMP]." (citizensassembly.gov.on.ca "How We Got Here")

"A Mixed Member Proportional system combines members elected in local districts and members elected for the whole province from party lists to serve as Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs) in the legislature.This combination produces proportional election results that better reflect the wishes of voters." (citizensassembly.gov.on.ca "The Recommendation")

This is known as "one person, two votes". You would vote for a local representative, and for a Party. The two don't have to be aligned, giving you great flexibility.

As a bonus, there would be no more need for "strategic voting"! Many Ontarians have voted for one large Party to try to block another large Party, despite really wanting to vote for a third (smaller) Party. Under MMP, you could vote for a local representative from the larger Party (for example), and still vote for the smaller Party to help them get Proportional seats.

Under the proposal, the 90 traditional, locally-elected representatives would still predominate. But 39 representatives would be assigned by Party. For any Party with at least 3% of the popular vote, the formula would bring the percentage of seats in the Legislature to the percentage of the popular vote. (See citizensassembly.gov.on.ca "How the New System Works" for more details.)

Also, check out the Vote for MMP web site, which is published by "is a multi-partisan citizens’ campaign to support the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)" (voteformmp.ca "About Us").

If you have a blog, help spread the word by adding a "Vote for MMP" button from http://mmpbloggers.blogspot.com/

(We are not members or affiliates of any of the above organizations. We are expressing our support as individuals.)

Most importantly, if you are eligible to vote, make sure that you come out on October 10, 2007 and vote "YES" for MMP!

[Important Notice]

BlogThis! (Click to discuss this post on your own Blogger blog. To quote any text, highlight it before clicking.)