FPTP vs MMP

[Marcus Brubaker]

Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> The numbers such as 3% and 39 seats are completely arbitrary. They give
> the Greens power while shutting out the Family Coalition Party. As such,
> they indicate a wilful manipulation designed to advance the cause of
> small parties -- providing they're not too small. And the definition of
> " what is too small" is totally arbitrary.
>   

The Citizens Assembly was discouraged from increasing the size of the 
legislature significantly.  However, they also didn't want to make 
ridings unmanageably large.  This was the compromise.  Is it arbitrary?  
More or less.  But to make the number smaller would require a larger 
number of list seats.  However, to call it politically motivated is just 
plain wrong.

The group was randomly chosen from the general population and very 
diverse.  To even suggest that this was politically motivated 
demonstrates a lack of understanding of the process by which the 
proposal came about.  Take a look at 
http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/ , especially 
http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/assets/Democracy%20at%20Work%20-%20The%20Ontario%20Citizens%27%20Assembly%20on%20Electoral%20Reform.pdf
page 63.  (Well, page 47 but put 63 into your PDF viewer.)

> While FPTP has its downsides, it doesn't by design impose arbitrary
> limits on anything.
>   

Sure it does, it just obfuscates the limits instead of making them clear.

Marcus
--
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