Archives

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

The Ontario Citizen’s Assembly: In Their Own Words

Hat tip to Mark Greenan of Fair Vote Canada and Blogging For Democracy for pointing out this Youtube Video of the Ontario Citizens Assembly explaining the process and their decision in their own words:

Also, I’d be remiss if I didnt point to the cute Youtube cartoon video of “Billy Ballot” explaining MMP PR others have already pointed out in the blogosphere.

2 comments to The Ontario Citizen’s Assembly: In Their Own Words

  • Ive written a couple of web pages on this, the more recent being:
    http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/b2v.html

    The Ontario CA decision for MMP was a logical outcome of a (false) official line that there are “trade-offs” between all voting systems.
    Hence the choice of a mixed system.

    The independent written evidence to the Ontario CA mostly ( 800 out of 1000 submissions) came in in january 2007. The crucial vote on which system to model was held in the first meeting after Xmas in mid-february, effectively guillotining the spread of a different point of view.

    Assembly opinion was still in flux when the schedule came to an end, (with 1 april vote between MMP and STV) so we will never know whether support would have continued to shift from MMP to STV, as happened with the 11-month British Columbia CA.

  • Good propaganda video, at least they were somewhat honest about the party being the most important part of the whole scheme.

    Phrases like "Effective parties" beginning descriptive sentences and, my personal favorite by the way, "Your first vote the one for a party……" are pretty good indicators of what is front, centre, and of primary importance.

    The "where the list members come from" blurb gave me a chuckle

    "Elections Ontario will make the lists public so parties can show voters that their lists were created in a fair and open way."

    How will making the lists public show that they were created in a fair and open way? As (the federal) Liberals recently found out with Ed Corrigan getting your name even inked to a potential list of candidates can't be accomplished in a fair and open way, and the Michael Fortier gift gives us more than a small hint at how Conservatives will view these seats – they will be gifts and rewards to the party faithful.

    The clip goes on to say

    "The list members give you a new kind of representation."

    Again, you have to give them credit for their honesty, it will give Ontario a "new kind of representation", one where the members will not even have to pretend that the party who put them in their seats is not who they are responsible to first and foremost.

    "These members could concentrate on issues that matter to different regions of Ontario…"

    Yes, they could, but the big question is, given who they will owe their position of privilege and perks to, will they?

    From the look of their report they didn't give any consideration to ideas that do not include political parties – this is simply another unsupportable way of giving additional power and authority to the the party instead of the people they pretend to represent.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.