Italy uses a Mixed Member Proportional system and from what I can see, they have one of the most Officially Screwed electoral system in the world.
They have over 40 political parties (Strike 1) of which the majority are tied in to two coalitions.
But because the Italian system incorporates a 4% minimum in order to garner some of the assigned proportionality seats, the coalition with the most votes is not the party forming the government because they have more parties with less than 4% of the vote in their coalition. (Strike 2)
Strike 3 is attributed to the fact that an MMP system will let every small interest group form a party in an effort to garner 4% of the vote and get a representative in the assembly. The proposed system for Ontario would only require 3% making it that much more fringe party friendly. Here is a brief list of some of the party names.
Daisy-Democracy is Freedom Party
Rose in the Fist Party
Italian Radicals
Party of Italian Communists
S.O.S. Italy Party
In reading a few of the other names, I would imagine that it wouldn’t be long before we had political parties dedicated to core unions such as:
“The Teachers Union Party”
or
“The United Auto Workers Party”. (I would give you one guess at who would lead this one.)
Then we have New Zealand. This country had a two party system from 1909 to 1996 when they moved to a proportional system. What would Ontario have to look forward to with an MMP system?
New Zealand has a strong party system in place. The first political party was founded in 1891, and its main rival was founded in 1909 — from that point until a change of electoral system in 1996, New Zealand had a two-party system in place. Today, New Zealand has a genuinely multi-party system, with eight parties currently represented in Parliament. Neither of the two largest parties have been able to govern without support from other groups since 1996, meaning that coalition government is required.
The two largest, and oldest, parties are the Labour Party (centre-left progressive) and the National Party (centre-right conservative). Other parties currently represented in Parliament are New Zealand First (populist, nationalist), ACT (free market), the Greens (left-wing, environmentalist), United Future (family values), the Progressives (leftist), and the Māori Party (ethnic).
I think that MMP will create more headaches in trying to form coalitions than allowing the government of the day to lead the people and the province. Stick to “First Past The Post”. The current system may not always get your favourite party in power, but whomever is in power will be able to run the show without having to make a bunch of back room deals for support.
First Past The Post has my vote on Election Day.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Great! Now sign up for the No MMP blogroll!
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Rick Anderson said it best on Monday evening at OISE in Toronto. I’m paraphrasing. “If voters want six parties represented in the legislature, that is what they deserve.”
You are afraid of the citizens of Ontario getting more choice in their votes. You’re not afraid of the NDP or the Green Party. You’re not even afraid of a “Teachers Union Party.” You are afraid of the giving the voters a chance to improve democracy in Ontario. If you are against MMP, what are you ultimately for? Do you expect the citizens of Ontario to have the antiquated First-Past-the-Post system in perpetuity?
Democracy is dangerous. Let play it safe and let the Monarch appoint the assemblymen.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
It really comes down to…
Do you believe and trust in “majority rule”?
Can you accept to live under “majority rule” regardless of who wins with a FPTP system of voting?
It should be obvious anyone with an extreme view,
including Socialists ..(DO NOT)..
Proportional representation, will allow the minority to dictate to the majority.
Single issue parties will become the norm.
Coalition governments will be the only form viable..
Coalitions of extreme views, given greater weight than
there numbers warrant.
MMP allows for direct voting for a politcal party, which will provide a (list) of candidates, who will owe their electoral life to their party, since they have no constituants.
Any political system that allows political parties to have legislative representation without a “constituancy” to represent is just plain wrong.
Also
3% of the popular vote ..SHOULD NOT.. propel a fringe party into a position of Coalition maker,
which in reality is,
the Minority dictating to the Majority.
Thats not democracy.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
The tone of Rick Anderson’s quote comes across the way I feel which is
“If voters want a government mired in bureaucracy via a makework program for people who can’t get elected as individuals but want a chance at a good government pension for turning our country into a cesspool of politicians grabbing for their share of the pie, then that is what they deserve”.
I’ll stick with First past the post thank you very much.