Yet more Apr. 6-10th

A chance to change B.C. politics
Quesnel Cariboo Observer
Fri 10 Apr 2009
Page: 9
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_cariboo/quesnelobserver/opinion/letters/42782167.html

STV beats current system
Quesnel Cariboo Observer
Fri 10 Apr 2009
Page: 9
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_cariboo/quesnelobserver/opinion/letters/42782257.html

'No' side of STV scaremongers
The Daily News (Kamloops)
Fri 10 Apr 2009
Page: A6
Section: Opinion
Byline: David Denbigh
Source: Daily News

With all due respect to Mr. Bill Tieleman, his article stating the negatives of BC-STV is scaremongering and full of inaccuracies.

Mr. Tieleman suggests that STV will increase the power of political parties. Quite the opposite. With STV, political parties will still be important, but they will have to be more accountable to the voter, because the voter will have a wider choice.

Yes, the ridings will be larger than currently exist, but they closely replicate the existing federal ridings. Those ridings are represented by one MP. The provincial ridings will have as many as five MLAs as your representation in the House in Victoria. That gives you, by my calculation, a 500 per cent better ratio of MLA to voter than the current federal system. To say you won't have local representation nor accountability as a result, is, in my humble opinion, nonsense.

Members of the No campaign suggest they would prefer some form of Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system. There was a reason the Citizens Assembly in 2004 rejected that idea. MMP means just that. Some MLAs are "elected," others are "selected."

If we reject STV on May 12, we will lose a golden opportunity. That opportunity is not likely to return for a very long time. There is too much at stake for the political parties in future governments to give the electorate that chance again.

To his credit, Premier Gordon Campbell initiated the Citizens Assembly and realized that the vote to change was very close in 2005. His government has given us a chance to try again. On May 12 we get a unique opportunity to be leaders in electoral reform in this country.

Change is at times scary, but to not change a system that is unfair and undemocratic is ludicrous.

David Denbigh

Kamloops

Electoral reformers leading on-line pack
Kitimat Northern Sentinel
Thu 09 Apr 2009
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/northernsentinel/news/election/42745017.html

Why STV is A-OK
Chetwynd Echo
Thu 09 Apr 2009
Page: 30
Section: Viewpoint
Byline: Max Fawcett
Column: The View From Here
Source: Chetwynd Echo

Generating interest in a complicated electoral system is difficult at the best of times. It's nearly impossible when you're competing with Guitar Hero and hot mini-donuts, as was the case at this past weekend's trade show for the advocates of the Single Transferrable Vote system, or STV, that will be on the ballot in the May 12 provincial election. But while Peace FM and the mini-donut man were the most popular exhibits, the BC-STV booth that had the misfortune of being placed between them was the most important.

STV is the alternative to the First-Past-The-Post electoral system chosen by the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform that was convened after the 2001 election. After 11 months of delegations, presentations, and conversations, the 160 ordinary citizens drawn randomly from the voters list settled on STV as the best alternative to the existing system. In the 2005 election it fell just short of ratification, coming within two per cent of the requisite 60 per cent support, and two constituencies shy of the 79 needed with over 50 per cent support.

That STV sounds more like something a careless sailor might pick up on shore leave than an important improvement to our democratic system doesn't help its marketability, but what it lacks in style it more than makes up for in substance.

Most importantly, it ensures that every vote will count, and every voter's input will matter. Unlike the existing First-Past-The-Post system, which consistently creates artificial majorities, the STV system will produce a provincial legislature that corresponds to the popular vote. In other words, there would be no repeats of 1996, in which the NDP formed a government despite earning fewer votes than the BC Liberal Party, or of 2001, in which the BC Liberal Party won 97 per cent of the seats despite winning only 57% of the popular vote. The First-Past-The-Post system exaggerates majorities, meaning that a party can win 40 per cent of the votes, 60 per cent of the seats, and 100 per cent of the power. STV eliminates this dangerous and undemocratic distortion.

Equally important, STV changes the nature of voting from an exercise in binary thinking to a more nuanced process. Rather than being forced to pick a horse and run with it, voters can assign preferences to each candidate. This eliminates the need for "strategic voting"," wherein a voter casts a ballot for a candidate other than their preferred choice in order to block the candidacy of a third, and other such perversions of democracy common to the First-Past-The-Post system. It will also make every ballot meaningful, alleviating the frustrations of voters who run against the crowd in stronghold ridings like our own.

As in 2005, those driving the BC-STV campaign have to meet a very high threshold of public support. In addition to attracting at least 60 per cent of the overall vote, they must earn at least 50 per cent in all 79 ridings in British Columbia. Let's do our part for democracy and the future of our province and ensure that the riding of Peace River South says yes to STV.

Local group forms committee to support BC-STV
The Daily News (Prince Rupert)
Wed 08 Apr 2009
Page: 3
Section: Local News
Byline: George T. Baker
Source: The Daily News

Primary goal is to allow public to make an informed vote.

Dale White, 57, of Prince Rupert has thrown his weight behind the BC-STV vote. Well who the heck is Dale White?

He's one of millions of British Columbians who will have the opportunity to cast their vote on whether or not to choose the new voting system based on the Single Transferable Vote (STV).

White has also become a local advocate for changing the way British Columbians vote and believes Rupertites should support the voting system.

"People are often afraid of voting for someone who could be seen as a wasted vote,' said White.

White argues that too often the voter chooses for a candidate of lesser evil rather than the candidate of choice.

"Often people say, well I like a candidate but I don't like his or her party and so don't vote for the person they like," said White.

White decided to become an advocate for the voting system after showing up to a meeting held by Andre Carrell the BC-STV pro campaign. He said that talk convinced him that the STV voting system, which allows people to vote for candidates on a sliding scale, would greatly benefit voters and smaller parties.

The fact that only 13 people showed up to hear Carrell speak about the virtues of STV perhaps suggest that locals either remain ill-informed or uninterested in the subject. Given that they will have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they are in favour of the new system or not, White feels its important for both sides of the issue to ensure voters are well informed before they have to decide.

Hence, White will be hosting an information booth at the Rupert Square Mall this Sunday to let people in on how STV works and why it might be a good idea to accept.

Both sides have been funded with $500,000 each to promote their side, a change from 2005 when a lot of the confusion was responsible for the vote dying by a mere 2 per cent - 58 per cent of voters supported STV but the electoral reform requires 60 per cent.

Two examples that are often floated as choices are the countries of Malta and republic of Ireland, which both use STV to elect national governments.

But those examples have become as much a part of the criticism of STV as it has been a part of the proposal.

Under the new system of voting, MLAs would be grouped in larger voting districts. The North Coast would be included in a riding that would include the Skeena and Stikine riding, with a territory the size of the federal riding of Skeena-Bulkley Valley.

Voters would elect three candidates by ranking all the candidates first-to-last.

Critics have said this style of voting would make life more challenging for smaller parties, not help them, and believe that the proposed voting system would make it less likely that voters would have effective representation.

White wasn't sure what success STV would have this go around. He said its been difficult getting a sense of how people will vote. "I have no idea. A lot of people say they can't even remember that the [STV] vote ever happened," said White.

Single-transferable vote means choice
The Daily News (Kamloops)
Wed 08 Apr 2009
Page: A6
Section: Opinion
Byline: Grant Fraser
Source: The Daily News

Re: STV System Is A Recipe for Disaster.

Mr. Tielman's column encourages us to keep a bad electoral system because a coalition of political insiders doesn't want to change to a system that gives them less power.

BC-STV was designed by British Columbians who have no political affiliation.

One hundred sixty people were selected at random, one man and one woman from each riding. After a year of learning about political systems around the world and several public hearings, they designed a voting system for us, the voters.

Remember that half of the Citizens Assembly members were from rural ridings and they favored STV over MMP.

When you first look at a map of the proposed riding, it seems large.

When you look closer, you realize that most of the riding is uninhabited forest and that people live along the highway.

In fact, the combined Cariboo-Thompson riding is about the same size as the existing North Coast riding, which is mostly ocean and smaller than the existing Skeena-Stikine and Peace River North ridings, which are also mostly forest. The people up north have been proving for years that it's not impossible to run an election in a large riding.

STV is about voter choice. The No side insults the voting public by suggesting that they are incapable of making a choice that isn't spoon fed to them by party insiders. Let's put an end to safe seats and strategic voting and let's change to the system that gives the power back to the voters.

Grant Fraser

Kamloops

STV not complicated
Comox Valley Record
Tue 07 Apr 2009
Page: A27
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/comoxvalleyrecord/opinion/letters/42635847.html

Voters can make a difference
Penticton Western News
Tue 07 Apr 2009
Page: 7
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/pentictonwesternnews/opinion/letters/42631427.html

Vote for change with new system
Salmon Arm Observer
Tue 07 Apr 2009
Page: 6
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_thompson_nicola/salmonarmobserver/opinion/letters/42640757.html

Do you know about BC-STV?
Dawson Creek Daily News
Tue 07 Apr 2009
Page: A7
Section: Editorial & Opinions
Byline: Sandra Hoffmann

In addition to an upcoming provincial election on May 12, there will be a referendum question on electoral reform. In 2005, BC-STV received 58 per cent support, just two per cent shy of passing.

The referendum question will ask which electoral system should B.C. use to elect MLAs: the current system of First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) or BC-STV (Single Transferable Vote). BC-STV is the proportional type of electoral reform recommended by the Citizens' Assembly. It satisfied all three of their top criteria: near proportionality, better representation, and more voter choice.

Under BC-STV, the current ridings would be combined to form larger districts with multiple MLAs, resulting in greater competition between candidates. Locally, the Peace River North and the Peace River South would be combined to form a two MLA district, giving all voters an additional MLA to turn to. The number of MLAs for our area will not change under BC-STV and the total number of MLAs would also remain unchanged.

Rather than marking an X by a single candidate, in a multi-member district one can rank as many or as few candidates as desired. They can stay within party lines or go beyond. It is the voter's choice. If your first choice has more than what is needed to be elected, the portion that is surplus is transferred to your second choice. If your first choice has been eliminated, because they have the fewest number of votes, then your vote is transferred at full value to your second choice. This transfer process continues, considering further preferences, until the necessary number of MLAs have been elected. Under BC-STV there are fewer wasted votes as a result of this transfer process.

I urge people to learn more about BC-STV in order to make an informed decision on May 12. Attend an upcoming presentation, listed at http://bc-stv2.blogspot.com, or visit http://stv.ca. A short but very informative video is also provided at http://stv.ca/watch. Contact Wilf Chelle at 772-5607 or Sandra Hoffmann at stvnorthernvoice@yahoo.ca for further information or to find out how you can make a difference.

Sandra Hoffmann,

Fort St. John, BC

STV, pro not no...
Prince Rupert Daily News
Tue 07 Apr 2009
Page: 4
Section: Opinion & Letters
Byline: Dale White
Source: The Daily News

To the Editor,

In the Letters to the Editor (No to STV, Apr.3), the correspondent uses the example of Ireland to project outcomes for B.C. if we vote to change our current system of electing MLAs.

Making these types of predictions is impossible because voting systems are only one factor that shape a society. We only have to look at the differences between B.C. and other regions of Canada to realize that our current First Past the Post system does not guarantee similar political cultures.

As well, the writer makes reference to the Gini index and infers that Ireland does poorly on this equality index because of its voting methods. While it is true that Ireland scores worse than its European neighbours (most of whom have some form of proportional representation) it is also true that Ireland does better than Canada, the U.K., and the U.S. who do not. (www.cia.gov)

All of this, however, is beside the point. Making predictions is guesswork. Both sides have their best and worst case scenarios.

What we do know is that STV allows voters a wider choice of candidates and results in a legislature that more accurately reflects the proportion of the votes that each political party receives. It is fairer and more representative.

- Dale White

Learn about STV option
Parksville Qualicum Beach News
Mon 06 Apr 2009
Page: A12
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/parksville_qualicumbeachnews/opinion/letters/42549247.html