Single transferable vote for BC?
Aug. 31st, 2007 01:43 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jawnbcWith little attention the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission released its report on new provincial ridings here in BC. Which I found interesting for a number of reasons. In our most recent provincial election (in 2005), a plebescite was held on whether or not to change how we elect MLAs (the provincial equivalent of MPs) out on the Wacky Wet Coast™. With neither the Liberals or NDP taking a clear public position on the matter, voters nonetheless almost voted for a new system.
What is particularly impressive about the result was the bar was set higher than usual in advance: at least 60% of all voters, with 50% or in support in at least 60% of the ridings (49 of 71), had to support the change for it go forward. in the end the vote was 57% in favour--with 77 of 79 districts supporting the measure by more than 50%. Both the "no" ridings were in Kamloops--but even there the split was 50.5/49.5 in both ridings. Of the 1,749,339 votes on the proposal, 1,049,604 were needed for it to pass. In the end 982,364 people voted yes.
The proposal was for a Single Tranferable Vote system, where voters rank candidates in order of preference while electing several MLAs as their representative. Existing ridings would be grouped into larger ridings of between 4 and 7 seats, each with a quota for winning a seat [(total # of valid votes cast/(#of MLAs +1))+1]. After everyone's first votes are allocated those who make the quota are awarded a seat; those candidates with the fewest preferences get dropped and the second choice of those voters are awarded those votes. The process continues until all seats in a riding are allocated. Theres a bit more to it, but this is pretty much the system used in Ireland. Unlike places like Australia, a person can choose to only preference as few as one candidate; in other words, no "preference trading" deals between parties that could circumvent the democratic process.
The Electoral Boundaries Commission was tasked to propose any riding changess in advance of a 2013 election. BC's population is both growing and becoming more and more urbanized. Rural parts of the province are losing population rapidly, while places like downtown Vancouver have nearly doubled in the last 10 years. The non-partisan Commission holds meetings, does research, crunches numbers and then makes recommendations. With an STV proposal on the ballot in 2009 (which both parties are claiming to support now), they also had to take into account what an STV electoral map would look like in 2013.
They proposed that the:
+Current first past the post system: increase to 81 ridings, by eliminating 3 and creating 5. Vancouver, Surrey, Kelowna, the Fraser Valley, and Burnaby/New West/Coquitlam would each gain a seat; the North, Cariboo-Thompson and Columbia-Kootenay would each lose one.
+STV system: proposed ridings into 20 ridings, which are really amalgamations from the 81 proposed for the current system.Vancouver would be 2 ridings, one with 5 MLAs the other 6. Three ridings in the far North would each have only 2 or 3 MLAs: most ridings would have 4, 5 or 6.
Voters could then rank candidates from several parties. Parties could choose to field a full slate of candidates or as few as one. Independents would also have a better chance of winning seats, as would minor parties like the Greens. It may also mean the end of majority governments--fine by me, make the bastards cooperate.
I find this all very exciting! I hope it comes through!
What is particularly impressive about the result was the bar was set higher than usual in advance: at least 60% of all voters, with 50% or in support in at least 60% of the ridings (49 of 71), had to support the change for it go forward. in the end the vote was 57% in favour--with 77 of 79 districts supporting the measure by more than 50%. Both the "no" ridings were in Kamloops--but even there the split was 50.5/49.5 in both ridings. Of the 1,749,339 votes on the proposal, 1,049,604 were needed for it to pass. In the end 982,364 people voted yes.
The proposal was for a Single Tranferable Vote system, where voters rank candidates in order of preference while electing several MLAs as their representative. Existing ridings would be grouped into larger ridings of between 4 and 7 seats, each with a quota for winning a seat [(total # of valid votes cast/(#of MLAs +1))+1]. After everyone's first votes are allocated those who make the quota are awarded a seat; those candidates with the fewest preferences get dropped and the second choice of those voters are awarded those votes. The process continues until all seats in a riding are allocated. Theres a bit more to it, but this is pretty much the system used in Ireland. Unlike places like Australia, a person can choose to only preference as few as one candidate; in other words, no "preference trading" deals between parties that could circumvent the democratic process.
The Electoral Boundaries Commission was tasked to propose any riding changess in advance of a 2013 election. BC's population is both growing and becoming more and more urbanized. Rural parts of the province are losing population rapidly, while places like downtown Vancouver have nearly doubled in the last 10 years. The non-partisan Commission holds meetings, does research, crunches numbers and then makes recommendations. With an STV proposal on the ballot in 2009 (which both parties are claiming to support now), they also had to take into account what an STV electoral map would look like in 2013.
They proposed that the:
+Current first past the post system: increase to 81 ridings, by eliminating 3 and creating 5. Vancouver, Surrey, Kelowna, the Fraser Valley, and Burnaby/New West/Coquitlam would each gain a seat; the North, Cariboo-Thompson and Columbia-Kootenay would each lose one.
+STV system: proposed ridings into 20 ridings, which are really amalgamations from the 81 proposed for the current system.Vancouver would be 2 ridings, one with 5 MLAs the other 6. Three ridings in the far North would each have only 2 or 3 MLAs: most ridings would have 4, 5 or 6.
Voters could then rank candidates from several parties. Parties could choose to field a full slate of candidates or as few as one. Independents would also have a better chance of winning seats, as would minor parties like the Greens. It may also mean the end of majority governments--fine by me, make the bastards cooperate.
I find this all very exciting! I hope it comes through!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-09-02 01:58 am (UTC)It still exists as an Optional Preferential System in NSW and Queensland, which are the two states that I have lived in (when I lived in Canberra, it was Proportional Representation, and completely different).
http://www.aec.gov.au/pdf/research/papers/paper1/res_rep_01.pdf - take note of pages 2-3 and page 10.
And in the NSW Senate, it's possible to vote below the line for 16 people only (although I insist and mark every box - it was over 300 on the last state Senate ballot paper!).