OP-ED: Berger's Choice on Electoral Systems

Tom BergerBy Maureen Bader, Anthony Hodgson and Neil Monckton
[Special to the Vancouver Sun, March 20, 2010]

Almost seventeen years have passed since laws governing B.C.'s local elections were updated.

And while it is laudable Premier Gordon Campbell has convened a task force to improve the fairness and transparency of local government elections across the province, there is one glaring omission from the list of topics the task force will review.

One of the single biggest concerns our three organizations hear expressed by citizens regarding local elections is the frustration they have with how they cast a ballot. To not include this item in the task force's review is a serious oversight. Currently, B.C.'s local governments can only choose between an at-large voting system or a neighbourhood constituency (or ward) system, or a combination of both. Almost every municipality in our province uses the at-large system.

For smaller population centres, the at-large system works well enough. However, concerns have been raised in some larger cities where civic parties are common because at-large voting often results in one party winning most or all of the council seats and can leave significant sections of the city underrepresented. These concerns prompted then-Vancouver mayor Larry Campbell to establish an electoral reform commission in 2004 under former B.C. Supreme Court justice Thomas Berger, to consider how the city's voting practices might be improved.

In his final report, Berger recommended virtually the only action possible under the Vancouver Charter -- he advised Vancouver city council to hold a plebiscite on adopting the ward system. This was a deja vu moment. Between 1973 and 1996 there had been five referendums on reforming the voting system in Vancouver -- three in favour of wards and two for keeping the at-large system. Berger's plebiscite in 2004 was the sixth vote and citizens expressed lukewarm support for the status quo.

But had citizens truly explored the limits of civic electoral reform in our province? Are wards or the at-large systems the only options for Vancouver or other B.C. municipalities who struggled with this question of democratic representation? Justice Berger did not think so.

Among his 23 recommendations, Berger made a little-publicized, but powerful suggestion that could ultimately throw open the door for a wider public discussion on how we elect our local governments.

Berger said Vancouver should be able to adopt a voting system "that best meets the needs and expectations of its citizens, as these change over time," noting that "increasing empowerment of municipalities appears to be the emerging trend in other English-speaking common law jurisdictions." He said voters might prefer a different voting mode, one in growing use globally. That mode is proportional representation.

A number of cities around the world use proportional representation to elect their councils. For example, Scotland switched to a form of proportional representation for all its local elections in 2007.

Berger recommended Vancouver petition the province for changes to its charter to give citizens a right to consider options beyond the limited wards/at-large duality. In 2005, the City of Vancouver asked Premier Campbell's government for this right.

Such a right exists elsewhere. Communities in New Zealand can choose between first-past-the-post or a more proportional system -- eight cities and towns, including the capital, Wellington, have made the switch. In the U.S.A., a wave of cities including Minneapolis, San Francisco, Oakland, and Aspen, among others, have started using a related way to vote called instant run-off or ranked choice voting.

Vancouver deserves an answer to its five-year-old request and the Local Government Elections Task Force offers the perfect vehicle for the government to respond. Our organizations therefore urge the task force to take this golden opportunity to explicitly address the issue of how citizens vote and including recommendations for local self-determination in its final report.

Maureen Bader is the BC director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, Antony Hodgson is the president of Fair Voting BC and Neil Monckton is the chair of Think City.

What about public funded campaigns?

I feel the average citizen would be a lot more comfortable if they knew their councillors and such, were not beholden to some outside financial supporter. Publicly funded advertising would cover most campaign costs. And then we could ban corporate and association financing of politicians. Other spending limits would be enforced and post election expense statements would be reimbursed. Band aids such as ward systems and other such reforms are futile without honest and fair minded citizens making the decisions.

electoral reform

I completely agree with Berger's recommendation. Our current system is not working as evidenced by the number of votes cast for the different parties and the final composition of Council. One other suggestion...with all due respect to everyone whose last name starts with A, B, and C....or even G, we should have non-identical ballots so that every candidate gets to have his or her name at the top of the ballot an equal number of times. We can do this...

Response From City

Nothing yet. However, city council just passed another motion asking again for the ability to choose. Here's what it said:

"Provide local governments with the authority to use any method of elections they wish to use, and repeal the requirement for Lieutenant Governor in Council approval to adopt such a change."

According to preliminary survey results on electoral reform measures that were presented by Think City to council on March 25, the public is very much in support of this. For more info about what Vancouverites want click here.

 

Response?

So, was there never a response to the request?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.