Writer questions merits of Westminster system of electing governments
To the Expositor:
Our municipal election ballots in Ontario (or is it all Canada?) are printed up such that we vote for the Mayor/Reeve, councillor(s) for our ‘ward(s), our trustee(s) for our board of education, all on the same ballot.
If our federal election ballots were printed such that we could vote independently for our ‘local’ member of Parliament and also for the prime minister…think of it: it might change nothing. especially for people who vote for a party, regardless of who’s ‘running;’ it would obliterate the idea of “popular vote” because people would be voting for each MP and PM separately—so we wouldn’t need to keep changing the boundaries (I’ve lived in the same location but been in three or four different ridings in the past 42 year.
It would scrap the confusion about do you vote for an MP who you like, even if you’re not sure about that leader or do you vote for the PM, even if you don’t think the corresponding MP is up to the job.
It would minimize the truth behind the people who say their vote doesn’t count. They would have two votes and both would count.
We could vote for who we actually want, not have to do ‘strategic voting.’
Maybe it won’t change anything in Ottawa or maybe it would give more Canadians a reason to raise the turnout from 44 percent and go vote.
Maybe we wouldn’t have to worry about a majority government who runs amok.
Maybe the politicians would have to represent their ridings/constituents, instead of following a federal party.
All the MPs and the PM would have to work together for what’s best for the entire country, and more accurate regional representation.
Julie Desaulniers
Killarney
