Complaint about the MMP Debate

[c9]

A popular complaint about MMP is that it will give too much power to the political parties. The basis for this complaint is that 39 seats out of 129 will be determined by the popular vote for the parties and taken from a party list, and the parties will control who gets on the lists.

While this is accurate, it's almost identical to what happens today. Parties can appoint anyone they want to any riding, parachuting in candidates who just want a "safe seat".

As a comment I read states, "Complaining about MMP because it gives parties control over who is a candidate is like complaining that under MMP the ballots will be made out of paper."

Comments

The only problem I have with Ontario's MMP system

[(Anonymous)]

I voted at the advance polls at the local community centre today (no lines, just a couple of bored poll clerks) and reluctantly voted in favour of MMP. Why reluctantly?
It's because the system as proposed would only provide a single province-wide MP list. When I was in Scotland earlier this year, they were in the middle of their elections to the Scottish Parliament, which -as is commonly touted by pro-MMP partisans- uses a MMP system. However, the Scots have chosen to divide their bonny land into a series of regions (i.e Strathclyde, Edinburgh, Borders, Fife, Highlands and Islands, etc...), each of which have their own constituencies, but also their own MP lists. Thus, a voter on the Isle of Skye who loves their local Labour candidate, but also wants the SNP to stick it to those bastards in Westminster can vote for the party of their choice, but also get an MP who might actually be from the region and have an office there too.
Of course, Scotland isn't that big, especially compared to Ontario, but that just makes the single list idea proposed by the Citizens Panel that much more absurd. Since the list system is designed to make individual votes more equal, and since there are more individuals in the more populated southern regions of Ontario, the placement of an extra northerner at the top of a province-wide list seems foolish if proper rep by pop is the idea behind MMP.
So, split the province into regions, assign them a certain number of list candidates based on population size, and then further cut the number of FPP ridings. Instead of the 90 and 39 division, how about 75 and 54, or even - God forbid - 65 and 64. Then take those 64 list seats, and allot them to the regions based on population. That way, traditionalists will still have a riding of their very own in which a Tory or Liberal can take advantage of Westminster's cruel electoral logic, and everyone else can elect that Green, Libertarian, Marxist-Leninist, or Rhino candidate they've always secretly wanted to vote for.
In short, everybody wins.

Justin "I don't have an account" Braganza

Re: The only problem I have with Ontario's MMP system

[c9.livejournal.com]

Very true, the regional divisions could be an issue. I have concerns about your idea of using 50% list seats though. The big draw to MMP for me is the chance to slightly adjust FPTP's failings. It's still possible under the MMP proposal to win a majority through regular FPTP seats (just win 65 of the 90). Under a more PR-heavy approach (which several countries do use) this would not be possible, and I think it should still be possible.

I like the idea of introducing MMP as a slight change to our current system, because a) the election results won't be dramatically different and b) we can then consider further changes in future if we think we still need to improve.

A challenge with using regions / riding groups is that the system becomes more complicated and harder to understand. If the system is hard to figure out, people may not trust it as much, or may feel like they have no control. "But everyone in my riding voted Liberal, why did the local Green get a seat??"