The new BC Constitutional Act prepares the way for a provincial plebecite on electoral reform for late next year. According to Les Layne, senior journalist for the Times Colonist, this newly created statute is looking more and more like a backroom deal between the government and the Greens and less and less like an honest attempt to make elections a more accurate reflection of the public will. Layne’s reasons for saying this are simple: everything in the act suggests that the NDP-GREEN coalition – government by arrangement – has ‘hardwired’ into its body certain provisions to make it impossible to fail. To adopt a proportional representation system where minor parties would receive a portion of the legislative seats equivalent to their popular vote. Layne goes on to show the Greens potentially quadrupling its seat count by simply garnering a lot of third place votes. In a very historically polarized polity such as BC, proportional representation suits the NDP and Greens better because most of their seats come from urban constituencies where the greater population creates more artificial MLAs. I am totally opposed to having proportional prepresentation or the preferential ballot as all it does is lock the province into a balance of power that forces us to endure minority governments ad infinitum. Add to the evidence that this concept has been defeated twice already, the first time when it was headed up by an independent citizen’s parliament with a much higher threshold of proof than the present 50% plus one. While I intend to visit the government’s website to check out its plans to engage public support, I will be fighting this proposal for what it doesn’t do: guarantee my right as a citizen to have my vote for a certain candidate of choice count in a clear manner. If the Greens want more representation in the legislature they should attempt to build a party platform that attracts voters the time honored way: one vote at a time, even if it means living under a majority government. Even the first-by-the-post system can produce effective minority situations where parties are forced together to pass laws on a as need’s basis. Instead, this political deal between Horgan and Weaver goes to the very heart of attacking what is a fundamental right of voters to choose who they want to represent them in parliament. That should not include people who have not actually allowed their name to be placed on a ballot. After all, if the government wants to introduce more fairness into the current setup, redraw the boundary lines to create more ridings in the built-up areas. At least that re-alignment would not mess with the choices presently available to the people.