Posts
If anything the results of our recent election show a great need for voter reform and revisiting the Ward System.
Why did those elected receive City Wide Support? Simply because that is the way the current system works. The only other alternative under this system is not to vote, which many did as can be seen by the lower voter turnout 32.25% in 2008 compared to 35.4% in 2005 and this despite a 2000 person increase to the voters list.
Five polling stations were removed in Nanaimo and replaced by two others. Did this have an effect? I have no doubt that it did particularly in the south end. While most going to Pauline Haarar School in 2005 could be expected to utilize the Convention Centre it is unlikely those who went to Bayview School would do the same. While some would go to Chase River or Georgia Avenue Schools many, without transportation, would have simply abstained from voting.
In 2005 Bayview and Pauline Haarar Schools accounted for 1733 votes. A simple analysis of the increases at Chase River (18) and Georgia Avenue (198) plus the votes cast at the Convention Centre (984), less than Pauline Haarar School in 2005, shows a total of 1200 votes. The resultant 533 vote deficit is significant.
With the current system there is no representation on council south of Ebert St. , the Ward System would see representation of all areas. In either system you would hope that votes would be cast for those with the broadest knowledge representative of the whole community.
To view the editorial I commented on go to: City council must take broadest viewpoint
1 comment:
The Ward system is a Toronto thing. That alone is enough to freak out the masses and nullify the idea without any critical thought or objective analysis. The idea of a ward sytem is preferable, but those at the helm of the ship realize it would have changed the political dynamics years ago. Much like the same situation in the Lower Insaneland regarding the amalgamation of the numerous police forces; those who have the power to make progressive change also have the most to loose. Namely, their redundant jobs. Therefore, the song remains the same.
Post a Comment