Comment 63092

By Robert D (anonymous) | Posted May 05, 2011 at 09:39:35 in reply to Comment 63074

There is no "unelected half" there is a half that was elected based on proportional representation.

Many Canadians are just as concerned, if not moreseo, by what "party" or "leader" they are voting for - and completely ignore local candidates in any event.

By having half the parliament elected by proportional representation, and half elected by fptp, you can allow voters to support their "leader" or their "party" without forcing them to support a local candidate they dislike.

This is the advantage of a blended system over a pure FPTP system - and one that I'm trying to incoprorate into FPTP.

Yes, you might end up with that same "rejected" candidates getting one of those "proportional" seats, but at least you won't have to deal with them as your local representative.

The "check" would be at the next election, where if you feel the party you supported has been appointing individuals who weren't competent, you can choose to support a different party.

We seem to disagree somewhat on what is the most important aspect of elections. You feel voters being able to "accept or reject" each specific MP is most important. Other people feel that the overall results reflecting the overall support in the country is most important. I feel both are important

I'm advocating a blended solution which attempts to keep what I see as the strenght of FPTP (having a local representative accountable to you) and proportional representation (which is having a parliament that reflects the overall support in the country). My suggestion isn't perfect either - but I think that it's a good start.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds