British Columbia's electoral reformers launched another round of online polling on Monday. But the questions they're asking, according to a Public Eye reader who was surveyed, are considerably more aggressive than posed by Fair Voting BC last month.
For example, respondents are asked whether they would be more inclined to support the single-transferable vote system if they knew "those running the campaign against BC-STV (who are the same people who were behind Glen Clarkâs failed administration) are doing so to preserve their chance to get back into power."
Asked about the matter, Fair Voting BC deputy campaign manager Tony Roy declined to address the specifics of that survey, saying, "I haven't seen the specific questions. But we asked Angus Reid to cast as wide a net as possible for all the reasons that people would support BC-STV, as well as the arguments against it, to see which ones are the most resonant."
The following is a reported list of those questions.
Do you strongly agree, agree, don't know, disagree or strongly disagree with the following statements:
1. It is important to have MLAs that are responsive to the community.
2. I would be more inclined to vote for BC-STV if I knew those running the campaign against BC-STV (who are the same people who were behind Glen Clark's failed administration) are doing so to preserve their chance to get back into power.
3. It is important to have MLAs that are part of a party caucus and respond to the party because it gets things done.
4. With all the economic turmoil, this is the last time to be changing the electoral system.
5. I would be more inclined to vote for BC-STV if I knew the campaign for BC STV is being run by a large group of citizens with support all over the province.
6. I would be more inclined to vote for BC-STV if I knew the campaign against it was being run by a few political insiders who want to keep things the way they are.
How would you rank the importance of:
1. An article about BC-STV in the Vancouver Sun.
2. Endorsement of BC-STV by David Suzuki.
3. Finding out BC-STV was proposed by ordinary citizens as the best option with respect to the provincial electoral system.
4. Learning BC-STV is as easy as 1-2-3.
Are the following statements are strongly persuasive, persuasive, don't know, not persuasive or not at all persuasive:
1. I don't know how a car works, but I can still drive my car.
2. The Vancouver Sun says calling the system too complicated for voters is an insult to British Columbians.
3. In places the STV system is used more people vote - this wouldn't happen if it was too confusing.
4. The STV ballot is simple, 1-2-3-4
5. Some people say STV is complicated, but it is also fairer so we should still support it.
Sometimes over the course of a survey, you learn things about the subject of the survey that can change your opinion. Now, after having taken the survey, please answer the following question again. Which electoral system should British Columbia use to elect members to the provincial Legislative Assembly?
1. Undecided, but leaning towards the single transferable vote electoral system (BC-STV)
2. The existing electoral system (First-Past-the-Post)
3. Undecided, but leaning towards the existing electoral system (First-Past-the-Post)
4. The single transferable vote electoral system (BC-STV) proposed by the Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform
Sean Holman reports for Public Eye Online.
Failed?
Well, Glen Clark's legacy was reducing his party to two seats. Hardly a triumph.
The STV system would have meant considerably more seats for the NDP. The NDP Faithful are completely against the STV. Their chance holding government, nil now due to their botched campaign, would be even less with the STV.
this is actually the same
this is actually the same questions used in the original poll I got- I was so angry by how leading the poll was
well, some of the questions
well, some of the questions are the same, specifically the first part, agree or disagree
I'm confused....
...wasn't Tieleman one of the people 'behind' Glen Clark's failed administration, and isn't he running the 'No' campaign?
Eschewing one's past like that definitely gives a new meaning to the term 'pragmatism.
;-)
One can only believe the
One can only believe the folks paying for the poll is using some of the money Gordo provided to both sides of the discussion.
If one recalles it wasn't Glen Clark running the NDP two elections ago, it was Ujjal Dosnage who ended up going federal Liberal and held a Ministerial position there. Any minute now someone will drag up Clarks deck. Which way I vote is my business and I sure don't need a bent poll to help me decide. I read David Schreck and Bill Tieleman for the no view, and a family friend from the group that came up with the STV route for the yes. Some polling gets a bit weird and this time around, they missed our place.
Really pathetic.
Amazing that an impression orchestrated by the discredited Canwest Media which has given the Campbell Liberals such a free ride for 8 years is still dredged up as an excuse to get a positive response for STV. How pathetic. It shows there is an ulterior motive behind the warm phrases like "power up your vote". Divide the anti-Campbell vote between a bunch of fringe parties run by people like Berman. Nice attempt by Hallsor from the yes side to con more people this time.
STV is not proportional
STV is not a proportional voting system. It is approximately proportional for parties with broad support but not for small parties. Its supporters say that it is 'fairly proportional'; it is more accurate to say that it is 'unfairly proportional'. A party with ten percent support, uniformly distributed, might not elect a single MLA.
It is argued that small parties can win seats through the transfer of second and higher choice votes. With a highly polarized electorate like that in BC, this is unlikely.
The Greens may win one or two seats - better than with FPTP - but they will never achieve fair representation. Their best strategy is to vote against STV in this referendum, and then campaign for a more proportional system.
Next time
I don't think anyone should vote against STV so that "we get a better system offered to us next time around". That won't happen. Are Ontario and PEI voters getting a 2nd referendum after voting down MMP last time out? Nope.
Vote against STV if you don't like it but don't vote against it thinking a better choice is just around the corner.
Globe and Mail Editorial
To borrow the pollster's phrasing, I strongly agree with this Globe and Mail editorial which appeared today (April 21st).
Mixed PR is best
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090420.weSTV21/BNStory/specialComment/home
Rod
Interestingly, and as you are probably aware, the Globe ridiculed MMP in Ontario too. Jeffrey Simpson in particular.
Right on Frank
And I've got a series of emails between him and me on the subject....the only opinion writer at the Globe during the Ontario referendum who supported the change to MMP was, as I recall, Rick Salutin...
Bill Tieleman responds
It's rather sad and hypocritical that the Yes side on STV that said it wanted to do politics differently and who complained vociferously when NO STV tested arguments against the Single Tranferable Vote would now attempt a smear campaign.
Yes I worked for Glen Clark in 1996 in his leadership campaign, the premier's office and election campaign as communications director. I also left that year and publicly disagreed with him on some key issues.
But what about other NO STV executive members - did Andrea Reimer - the former Green Party Vancouver school trustee and now Vision Vancouver councilor work for Glen Clark?
How about former Social Credit cabinet minister Bruce Strachan?
How about former Citizens Assembly representative Rick Dignard from the Sunshine Coast?
And does Fair Voting BC not know that Andrew Petter - Glen Clark's cabinet minister - supports STV?
The fact is that both sides have former politicians from all parties backing their positions.
Stop the smear arguments and get to the facts of the matter - debate the issue.