Monday, September 24, 2007

Just to clarify ...

... something from my last post.

Given the choice of several systems, I'd prefer STV. Long term, that might be the best way to reform the Senate. In the here and now, however, the choice is between FPTP and MMP -- and it's a no-brainer. It's MMP, all the way.

Besides, if we don't start reforming the system now, we may never get another chance to do it. Stupid op-eds, like this one in today's Hamilton Spectator, underscore the point. This guy says since FPTP worked well for 800 years, there's no need to change it now.

This one, you have to read. To compare the Meech Lake Accord (the white men with suits) to the Citizen's Assembly which represented THE PEOPLE and recommended this for a vote by THE PEOPLE is insane.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.


Jon said...

It's really sad. I also saw a Liberal Senator go on Politics with Don Newman on the CBC and say MMP was bad for democracy basically.

But his facts were all wrong!! I'm so disappointed in the CBC that they didn't have someone on at the same time to correct his facts, because he just influenced so many people with incorrect facts.

I agree that reforming the Senate with STV would be interesting. Or even abolishing the Senate (though Quebec wouldn't like that), and using MMP for the unicameral Parliament. Or using MMP in the House of Commons, and keeping the Senate as is.

Dan said...

I skimmed the Spectator article, wow what a horrible lack of comprehension of the history of the British parliamentary system.