REFERENDUM ADDENDUMS
Re “You say you want a referendum,” City, Aug. 30: I just don't understand ... how can having a third of the provincial legislation being named – not elected mind you, named – from a list of candidates made available by the parties, most probably by the leader, be a better way of electing a government?
Let's face it, preferential treatment, favouritism and nepotism are all alive and well in both the provincial and federal systems. MMP will bring us further back to the Middle Ages, where the King got to choose the sheriffs, the tax collectors and the military leaders without the public having word one to say about it.
What happens now is that we – those of us that do – vote for the person best able to help us in our neighbourhood. If we are lucky, that person is in the party that wins the majority of the races and gets to set up the government. It's not perfect but at least we can say, “I voted for that guy (or gal)” or “Don't look at me, I didn't vote for them.” With MMP, what we would get to say is: “Who the hell voted for this loser? Oh, nooobody!”
MARC DEMERS
I enjoyed reading your article, but I wonder what the basis is for the following statement: “Ontario is allocating $6.8 million for the public education campaign (nearly twice what BC spent on its 2005 referendum).”
I was active in the BC campaign and, as I recall, the Referendum Information Office here was given just $850,000 for an education campaign. Thus Ontario is spending nearly eight times as much on education! It shall be interesting to see if Elections Ontario does a better job of getting the word out.
WENDY BERGERUD
VICTORIA, BC
No comments:
Post a Comment