OrilliaMatters welcomes letters to the editor. This letter is in response to several recent letters about electoral reform.
********************
The debate on changes to our electoral system is healthy. No participant should dismiss another's viewpoint as “nonsense” or absurd.
When Canada adopted the “first past the post” system years ago, we didn't have political parties. Eligible voters simply went to the village square, or its equivalent, and raised their hands in support of an individual, with no party affiliation, to indicate that they wanted that person to represent them for the next term of office.
Proportional representation does away with that freedom of direct choice. According to Encyclopedia Britannica: “Proportional representation is an electoral system that seeks to create a representative body that reflects the overall distribution of public support for each political party.”
Who chooses the individuals that then sit in that representative body?
That is never clearly explained. I am sceptical about other persons choosing who I want to represent me. That pessimism is not limited to opponents. I want a say in who my Conservative representative is as well.
Let me add a thought to those presented by supporters of the “first past the post” system.
Political parties, leaders, party members and party supporters are continually evolving. That's what a healthy political party system demands.
Federal Conservatives are now engaged in a leadership race as a result of the last election. Sure, we won the most votes, and the Conservative caucus is the most representative caucus in Parliament; however, we didn't form government as we didn't win enough seats and our leader was found wanting.
The federal Conservative party must evolve past their 2019 performance. The next six months will see the Conservative party examine itself thoroughly. From leadership candidates, to party platform, to campaign approaches, everything will get a thorough examination.
That's healthy. Political losses present an opportunity to examine why you were not more successful, as a candidate or a party. That examination can be global or riding-specific.
In contrast, third parties or minority parties are never forced to examine what they did right or wrong to the same extent. Proportional representation wouldn't solve the situation, it would only make it worse.
Therefore, no evolution of leaders, platform or how they were doing things.
I continue to support the first past the post system. In large non-profit organizations and in Parliament, I have won and lost with that system.
I learned from my losses and wins came from what I learned in losing.
Doug Lewis
Orillia
********************
