It seems Canada will always have either a Liberal or Conservative minority or majority governance; and for much of this, we can credit our first past the post (FPTP) electoral system.
Meanwhile, the political parties’ leadership elections are more democratically decided by (I believe) a ranked-choice ballot system that typically results in multiple counts.
Are not we, the commoners, also worthy of such democratically representative choice?
Are we unworthy of not potentially having 15 per cent of the nation’s population deciding how we all are 100 per cent ruled?
To me, FPTP barely qualifies as democratic rule within the democracy spectrum, though it seems to well-serve corporate interests. I believe it’s basically why those powerful interests generally resist attempts at changing from FPTP to proportional representation electoral systems of governance, the latter diluting lobbyist influence.
From my understanding, when it comes to big-business friendly and thus favored electoral systems, low-representation FPTP-elected governments, in which a relatively small portion of the country’s populace is actually electorally represented, are the easiest for lobbyists to manipulate or ‘buy.’
It’s because in FPTP-elected governments, in regards to votes/voters, government is accountable to them.
A much more proportionately representative electoral system should create a greater challenge for lobbyists. The resultant government should be considerably harder for big business to steer – if at all, in some cases.
I feel I’d settle for any of the proportionately representative electoral systems, if that’s what it took to replace the current FPTP dinosaur.
Frank Sterle Jr.
• Send your letter to the editor via email to editor@theprogress.com. Please include your first and last name, address, and phone number.
• READ MORE: Chilliwack Progress Letters