[news] Local Electoral Reform Activist Makes Submission

[Steve Kisby]

http://www.alternatives.com/prms/2004/sk--0419.pdf

April 19, 2004
For Immediate Release

Local electoral reform activist Steve Kisby makes his submission to the Berger Commission, the Vancouver Electoral Reform Commission, making innovative recommendations such as proportional representation, ranked ballots, and neighbourhood associations.

"If COPE is so concerned about neighbourhood representation, as evidenced by their 'Wards Now' campaign, they should bring in a neighbourhood association system 'now', as has been done in other cities like Portland," said Kisby. "Portland, like Vancouver, has an at-large electoral system that consistently tops lists of the most livable cites in the world," continued Kisby.

Kisby, who attended many of the public forums and followed the debate closely, thinks a Proportional Wards system would be best for the city.  COPE, during the 1999 Vancouver election, supported such a system. As a Proportional Wards system retains the advantages of the current at-large system, many NPA supporters would support such a system as well.

In a Proportional Wards system, the voter has two votes. One for the local representative they think is best and another for the political group they think is best for the city. City council would comprise of both at-large and ward councillors. The elegance of the Proportional Wards system is that the positive aspects of at-large and ward systems are retained and the negative effects cancel each other out, making it the most often favoured form of proportional representation where local representation is a concern.

Other progressive suggestions made by Kisby include introducing Instant Runoff Voting for the Mayoralty race, spending controls and financial reporting, and using Single Transferable Voting or STV for at-large elections such as for the Park Board. 

Kisby recommends that Vancouver's electoral system be changed only through a plebiscite or referendum. "It has been said that Vancouver voters, in electing COPE, have also cast a vote for straight wards," Kisby said. "That's simply not true. In fact, in 1996, when asked, just under 60% of voters favoured keeping the current system," Kisby continued.

Steve Kisby is a long-time electoral reform advocate, beginning with submissions to the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing (Lortie Commission) in the early 1990s. Mr. Kisby, a resident of Vancouver, is active in promoting electoral reform at the federal, provincial, and local levels of government. He is currently a director of Fair Voting B.C. and serves as a spokesperson for a local independent advocacy organization, Fair Elections Vancouver.

Kisby's submission can be found on the Internet at 
http://www.alternatives.com/skisby/verc_submission.pdf

-30-

Steve Kisby can be reached at 604-323-0204, 604-645-2099 (pager), or by email at skisby at web.net

--------------------------

Submission to the Vancouver Electoral Reform Commission

April, 2004    
by Steve Kisby


First, I would like to thank the Berger Commission, and Mr. Berger personally, for having the opportunity to present this submission. I am very impressed with the many public forums that have occurred all over the city.

I've attended a number of the public forums, mostly as an observer, and would like to comment on a number of things I've heard. I also would like to make some recommendations to the commission. I make this submission in a personal capacity.

My submission is in support of a proportional wards system.


A Proportional Wards System

The elegance of a Proportional Wards (PW) system, more formally called a Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system, is that it is both a proportional system and a wards system, where the positive aspects of each system are retained and the negative effects cancel each other out. For example, a PW system would prevent Council from all coming from one area of town, as many have said the current at-large system allows, while still being proportional. PW would make it possible for segments of the population, such as youth -- who would not be strong enough to take a ward -- to get representation on the proportional side. Ranked ballots could be implemented, making all votes count. That would solve the "wasted vote" and vote splitting problems of First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) ballots.

There are known problems with a straight proportional representation system just as there are problems with a straight wards system. Straight pro-rep systems can suffer from too many vested interests being represented, a "tail wagging the dog" syndrome, and uneven or no local representation. Straight wards systems that use FPTP ballots are winner-take-all systems that suffer from unbalanced -- and sometimes wildly unbalanced -- election results, a sense of wasted votes, and "vote splitting" where there are more than two parties or candidates.
 
It is the characteristic of canceling out the negative effects of a straight proportional system or a straight wards system that makes a Mixed Member Proportional system the most often favored form of proportional representation where local representation is a concern.

In MMP, a voter has two votes. One for the local representative they think is best and another for the political affiliation they think is best for the city. Independents can run city-wide (as a political affiliation of one), and independents can of course run in ward contests. Political affiliation is preferred over party because at the municipal level there is a desire to have political parties down-played and groups of independent candidates often work together as a unit without a formal party structure or organization. An example of a simple group of candidates working together was Neighbourhoods Matters in the 1999 election, a group of three like-minded candidates.

In most MMP systems, half the positions are elected proportionally and half are elected from wards. However in some systems the proportional side is smaller, giving greater emphasis on ward representation. I suggest half so that the positive aspects gained by the proportional side can better minimize the negative aspects of wards. 

Voter turnout in systems that include some form of proportional representation or preferential voting (ranked ballot) have higher voter turnout when compared to FPTP systems.

Although the city of Vancouver briefly used a system of proportional representation in the late 1910s to the early 1920s, it must be noted that the system used was Single Transferable Voting (STV). The MMP system I am proposing here is not that system.

I can remember one woman, at the Killarney public forum, who passionately complained it would be typically Canadian to compromise and have a mixed system because she feared that having a mix would result in an inferior or compromised system. It has also been said that a mixed system, such as a proportional wards system or a mix of at-large and wards, creates a problem of having two classes of councillor. Those comments are based in speculation and pre-conceptions, rather than real cases and experience. 

As an aside, I was particularly struck by one forum participant who said that although most cities across Canada and in the United States have wards, the cities that consistently top the most livable cities in the world -- Vancouver, Portland, Seattle -- are ones that use an at-large system.


The Mayoralty Race

Where a single person is to be elected, FPTP systems have a vote splitting problem where a third or fourth candidate can be perceived as drawing votes away from one leading candidate, allowing another candidate to win. The winner receives less than a majority of the votes cast and is elected by a minority. FPTP also encourages voters not to vote for their true intentions, but to vote for what they perceive as the "lesser of two evils". This allows reported media polling to adversely effect voters and skews the election results away from being a true poll of all the candidates who are running.

The remedy for vote splitting and strategic voting is preferential voting, also called voting by ranked ballot, as voters mark their ballots 1, 2, 3, 4 instead of putting a single X. This type of ballot is known as "Instant Runoff Voting" in the U.S. because of how the ballots are counted when the leading candidate does not receive more than half of the votes when the first preferences are tallied.

I therefore ask that the commission recommend that where one person is to be elected, such as the election of the mayor, that a ranked ballot be used. Past elections for mayor have usually been between two strong candidates, but that may not always be the case. We need not wait for there to be a close election where a third candidate was perceived to have elected an illegitimate winner, as in the last US presidential election.

I further note that others have submitted to the commission, including Tom Pryce-Digby, a local lawyer who has carefully examined this issue, that Vancouver's enabling municipal statute, the Vancouver
Charter, permits a ballot where candidates are ranked, and permits City Council to specify how those ranked ballots are to be counted. Vancouver City Council could implement voting by ranked ballot, by by-law, without the need for provincial amendment to the Charter.


Independents and Wards

Independents would not fare better in a straight wards system, for the same reasons they do not get elected provincially or federally. So far, the number of wards being proposed, for instance, the 14 wards suggested by COPE, are roughly the size of a provincial electoral district. When is the last time that an independent was elected at the provincial or federal levels? 

Independents would not have a chance of getting elected without being tapped into the campaigns of one of the established parties. Independent candidates can run, of course, and can be effective in raising important issues during the campaign, but unless they have the considerable financial resources, and are already well known, such as the case of Carole Taylor (the last independent person to be elected to City Council) they simply would not make it.

Further, If the city rushes to straight wards, it will be without spending controls or financial reporting. The major parties, NPA and COPE, will still spend millions of dollars promoting their candidates, except that the money will be directed to elect their candidates in the various wards. 

 
Enhanced Neighbourhood Democracy 

Many of the actual examples cited in support of wards, where a particular issue in some part of the city was perceived to have been ignored, could have been taken care of by the current City Council if that council had instituted a system where all parts of the city were represented by city supported neighborhood associations. Each neighborhood association would be assigned a City Councillor to represent their concerns in much the same way Park Board supported community associations are assigned to elected Park Board Commissioners. In this system, City Council would divide up the city into neighbourhoods where democratically elected and operated associations would work with city staff, and their assigned City Councillor, to assist the city in future planning and solve community problems.

Local neighbourhood associations could provide the "community champion" that many pro-ward advocates are looking for.

I understand that Portland, another city that has an at-large electoral system and tops lists of the most livable cities in the world, has such a system.


The Election Ballot

A complicated ballot can be simplified by electing only half of council each election. This also adds a layer of continuity to the process of municipal governance. Examples of this can be found in Australia.

An MMP ballot would also shorten the current at-large ballot. On that type of ballot there would not be long lists of candidates, as the voter is voting only for political affiliations (which may include independents and groupings of independents) and for candidates seeking election in the ward of the voter. 


Spending Controls and Financial Reporting

With respect to spending controls and financial reporting, I would like to register my yes to both of those. In am concerned that implementing a straight wards system now would be without spending controls or reporting requirements, making it even more unfair than the wards system currently used provincially and federally. 

Most proportional systems are publicly funded, thereby reducing the influence of big money in determining election outcomes.


Plebiscite or Referendum on Electoral Reform

I would like to also register my yes for the commission to recommend that the electoral system be changed only through voter approval by a plebiscite or referendum on electoral reform.

The last election (in 2002) was not a plebiscite or referendum between the current at-large system and wards, and should not be interpreted as such.


Number of City Councillors

I personally would prefer a City Council that is small enough that it can work with city staff in a hands-on way, and relies on a non-partisan professional city staff. This would avoid the problems that occur in others cities where staff is changed in a partisan way when the majority on Council changes. 

I strongly recommend no more than 20 councillors. A smaller City Council makes it possible for citizens of Vancouver to get to know individual City Councillors. I also caution the city in comparing Vancouver to the city councils of other cities that have amalgamated into so-called "Mega Cities". Toronto, for instance, is now a mega city where that city's council is on par with our GVRD.


Recommendations

I therefore recommend that:

1. The commission recommend that a Proportional Wards system be implemented in Vancouver, based on the MMP system, where voters can vote for political affiliations and independents in a proportional vote and voters can vote for politically affiliated candidates or independents in a local ward vote. Ranked balloting can be implemented in both the proportional vote and the ward vote for enhanced voter choice and to remedy vote splitting and "wasted votes". This recommendation would be made along with other recommendations that would require a change to the City's Charter, and the commission is asked to simply state in its recommendations what parts of its recommendation Council can do on its own and what parts will require provincial legislation.

2. If a straight wards system is to be brought in,

  (a) A preferential ballot (also called a ranked ballot) would be significantly better than a First-Past-The-Post ballot. According to Tom Pryce-Digby, a local solicitor who has studied the Vancouver Charter and Single Transferable Voting (STV) systems, a ranked ballot could be implemented by City Council without a change to the Vancouver Charter.

  (b) That it be made clear that a superior system would have proportionality, that moving to a straight wards system now without proportionality is because of the limitations of the Vancouver Charter, and that going to a straight wards system is considered a step towards a better system.

3. If an at-large system is to be retained, that Single Transferable Voting (STV) be implemented.

4. For the mayoralty race, that preferential voting, also called voting by ranked ballot, be implemented. 


Steve Kisby is a long-time electoral reform advocate, beginning with submissions to the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing (Lortie Commission) in the early 1990s. Mr. Kisby, a resident of Vancouver, is active in promoting electoral reform at the federal, provincial, and local levels of government. He is currently a director of Fair Voting B.C. and serves as a spokesperson for a local independent advocacy organization, Fair Elections Vancouver.

Steve Kisby can be reached at 604-323-0204, 604-645-2099 (pager), or by email at skisby at web.net


References

Submission by Tom Pryce-Digby, solicitor
APPENDIX I, "Vancouver City Council Can Implement an STV Electoral System Under the Existing Vancouver Charter", http://www.vangreens.bc.ca/images/Vancouver%20Green%20Party%20-%20VERC%20Submission%20-%20March%202004.pdf

Information on Proportional Representation
Fair Elections Vancouver, http://www.alternatives.com/prorep/
People For Proportional Representation, http://www.peopleforprorep.ca

Information on Instant Runoff Voting (Ranked Ballots)
http://www.fairvote.org/irv/index.html 
http://instantrunoff.com

Information on Single Transferable Voting (STV)
New Zealand Electoral Reform Coalition, http://www.stvnz.org
South Australia State Electoral Office, http://www.seo.sa.gov.au/flash.htm