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

[c9.livejournal.com]

As is your right! I hope you've checked out www.yourbigdecision.ca (the neutral information site set up by Elections Ontario) as it may have some answers for you.

Or if you want, drop me a line and I can try to find answers for you.

[c9.livejournal.com]

I agree that there are flaws in the MMP proposal, that's for sure. There are flaws with every system, and it's tricky to navigate everyone's needs and wants I bet. The MMP system was chosen by a group of randomly-selected Ontarians (one from each riding) after they reviewed many different types, like STV, FPTP, and MMP. (more: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/types.htm)

Some info with regards to your points:

1. Yes, there will be 90 ridings instead of 107. What would happen is each riding would become 10% bigger. No region will bear a bigger impact, in terms of pure geography you're absolutely right, more square kilometres will change in Northern Ontario than in Southern Ontario.

2. The MMP MPPs (that's a mouthful to say) would be accountable to the voters, just like the specific riding MPPs. For example, many people do go directly to their local MPP for help when there's an issue, but what if your local MPP was part of a party you disliked? Some might prefer to speak with an MPP from a party they support, for example. Additionally, these other MPPs would have the same duties as all MPPs today around committee work, writing and reviewing laws, voting, etc. In most jurisdictions that have adopted MMP (or systems like it), the list MPPs have often run for election in ridings, but maybe come in 2nd or 3rd -- think of a PC candidate in downtown Toronto, for example, or Green in Thunder Bay. So what happens there is the MMP MPP still feels like they have a riding to be responsible to, and they could have an office there and do everything that regular MPPs do today. In fact in some countries that use MMP, they found that the list MPPs *want* to become riding MPPs, so they have incentive to spend time in ridings.

3. I understand where you're coming from by calling them "unelected", but they would be elected by regular votes, just like everybody else. They wouldn't be attached officially to a single riding like under the current system, but they would still be voted in according to votes from across the province. Some people see that as a way to have their vote count for more, since their local MPP might have a completely "safe seat", and therefore the single vote doesn't have an impact on the election results by itself. Under the MMP proposal, every vote would have an impact all by itself and collectively too. Remember too that the list of list MPPs would be published ahead of time, so you'd know who a party chose and whether you liked or disliked the list. In some countries they use a hidden list, so you have no idea what you're voting for. That would be scary to me.

I agree that the referendum is likely to fail -- 60% + a majority in 60% of the ridings is quite huge. The Liberals and PCs do have much to lose, since they wouldn't get those unbalanced majorities as often. It's also a shame that the issue is so quiet and unknown. Most people apparently support it once they learn about it (a recent poll showed this, not sure of the % though). Oh well. At least we're talking about it, that's an important step!

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??"

[c9.livejournal.com]

Absolutely they should work just as hard, but I meant something like this:

What if your local MPP was really anti-gay, constantly talked up banning equal marriage, but you were trying to get married and couldn't find someone to perform the service? You might want to complain to your local MPP about this issue, but in this example you might not feel comfortable doing so. That's what I was thinking of.

I 100% agree that I can't wait, election results are so fun. I usually hold a party, but since Vincent and I are both working at polling stations, there will be no party this time.