Politicians want to change what your vote means

Dear Editor,
Politicians want to change what your vote means.
Question asked:  Should there be a Referendum?  Answer: No referendum because, my opinion is, there are a variety of ways of influencing the outcome. Logic or mathematics nor common sense are the strong points of the human race.
Here is the way I see a new and different election process which is more democratic than the “first through the gate process” we currently have.  This process goes for the provinces as well.
The current method in my view is not democratic at all.  In theory 26 per cent of the popular vote could elect 100 per cent of the seats.
Think back to Social Credit and the Conservatives where around 40 per cent of the popular vote delivered about 90 per cent of the seats.
That resulted into dictatorships every time.
With my proposal all parties will have a chance of getting at least some members into parliament (even the communists or a pot party).
If you think about the Green Party currently having only one member in the federal parliament, while the percentage was about seven per cent of the popular vote clearly indicates for more than one seat.  It should have been seven per cent of 340 seats, which is 23 seats. This may help many realize the justification of the following proposal.
Here it is:
All parties make up a list of their candidates which will have to be apportioned in accordance with the population of each province.  Eg. Party X makes a list of, let’s say 100 candidates (graduated – the party’s choice) with the leader on the top.
From there the list goes one for each province and territory and starts with the next tier until the 100 names have been put down.
However, provinces with the greater population would get proportionally more people elected to parliament than others.  In other words, a province with three million people will get three members and the one with one million people only one.
Some figuring has to be done, but it is quite possible to do.
Next:  for argument’s sake, let’s say that 12 million people vote for 340 seats.  That would mean 12,000,000 divided by 340 equals 35,300 votes gets you one candidate.
If Party X gets a total of 430,000 votes then each of the provinces and territories will get one member in parliament.  The mathematics will have to be worked out to make it more precise.
Next: Canadians will not vote anymore in constituencies but globally.  In other words wherever you are you vote for the party that you want to vote for.
All the votes for the various parties are added up for each party.  The total number of votes divided by the number of seats in parliament gives you the magic number for a seat. Then you divide that number into the votes a particular party gets and that gives you the number of members in parliament for that party.
Then the list of apportionment, decided by the party, comes into play.
You have a truly democratic division of the seats in accordance with the votes cast.
Yes, there will be mainly minority governments but that means that a common consensus has to be worked out to make changes.
Frank VanderKley
Trochu, Ab.

About the author

Avatar

Submitted