More PR thoughts 
Following up yesterday's discussion of the 12% PR proposal....

James Bow wrote today:
Then there is the fact that these at-large MPs will have been elected by no-one.
How do you keep bad MPs off of the plate? In true at-large elections, you can
vote against individual members of a party's slate; in this election, even if
the parties put up a slate of their preferred nominees before the election,
there is little an individual voter can do to express his displeasure over an
at-large candidate except by voting against the party's candidate within the

Also, in the comments yesterday Mike wrote:
We elect representatives. We do not elect parties. It is the political
class that thinks of it the other way around.The objective of a parliament is to
have representatives. Traditionally geography is used to denote groups to be
represented. PR is simply reconfiguring the grouping by party of preference.
This has much appeal to the political class as they can then focus on their base
and to hell with the rest.

So, what about voting more than once? Once for a constituency MP and then a ranking process for regional MPs.

Top of the ballot (and I would suggest larger or bold font) would be the constituency candidates as we have now. Vote for your constituency MP.

Bottom of the ballot would be the regional candidates. Rank all the regional candidates for each party from 1 to x - you wouldn't need to rank for every party if you don't wish to but you could and you can rank from 1 to as high as you wish. The number of regional MPs for each party would be determined after determining the consituency MPs and the rankings would determine which regional candidates win.

It might get a little messy for large regions. In John Bosson's proposal, with 42 regional MPs, Ontario would get 16 - meaning each party could propose 16 candidates - which would be a freakin' huge ballot. I would suggest making the regions smaller. Break Ontario into TO, West, East, North or something like that which would preserve more accountability and representation.

Would this solve James' issue of electability and Mike's issues of representation and the power of the political class?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?