FPTP vs MMP

[Evan Leibovitch]

phil wrote:
> Note also that when riding associations are involved there is
> sometimes (at least minimal) opposition to party leadership attempting
> to get their hand-picked insiders elected.
That works both ways. Sometimes the central party intervenes when a
local special interest group packs the riding association to get one of
their own nominated as the candidate. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberals_for_Life for one example.

Occasionally when this happens, the un-nominated person runs
successfully as an independent, which is a good counterbalance against
this practice and generally good for democracy. (The highest profile
recent example of a person rejected by party but endorsed as an
independent is US Congressman Joe Lieberman, though BC MP Chuck Cadman
demonstrated how it works in the Canadian system.)

As well, a sitting M(P)P disgusted with the evolution or execution of
their party's policies can leave the caucus (or be expelled) and sit as
an independent (ie, Carolyn Parrish, David Kilgour). Under MMP, there is
a whole block of people who must either vote the party line, be expelled
from the legislature, or be accountable to nobody.

By definition MMP is biased against independents, and is designed to
diminish their influence -- an interesting irony for a scheme claimed to
increase interest in personal political involvement.

- Evan
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists