Skip to content

LETTER: Electoral losers don’t deserve reward

Re: PQB Editorial – Three choices? Or is it four? ( The NEWS , June 6).
12230157_web1_170426-PQN-M-PQN-Letters

Re: PQB Editorial – Three choices? Or is it four? (The NEWS, June 6).

Andrew Wilkinson labelled the proposed electoral reform referendum correctly as “alphabet soup” and the beginning of your editorial mixes the soup even more.

You state, “Attorney General David Eby has decided the ballot will contain two questions – the first being a choice between the current system a proportional representation one.”

I believe either you or David Eby may have meant to say, “…. the current system or a proportional representation one” because the current system is the first-past-the-post system not proportional representation. It’s easy to get confused on any voter referendum systems because that’s what legislators want, particularly those minority political parties who never garner sufficient votes to form a government and who now want to squeeze out more seats based on a percentage of the votes. They want to be rewarded for just running for political office.

The referendum options put forth by John Horgan and his NDP party are as confusing as his hypocritical stance on oil pipelines.

You correctly called out Horgan in your editorial where he stated, “B.C. Premier John Horgan claims the existing system gives absolute power to the people who get the minority of votes,” when you responded, “No, it rewards the one who gets the most.”

I now wonder what percentage of votes cast will be required to approve a voter referendum system? Hopefully it will be any majority over 50 per cent and not some convoluted proportional or ranked percentage.

Mickey Donnelly

Parksville