A special committee of the B.C. legislature will look at electoral reform including proportional representation in B.C., but don't expect another referendum.
"I'm not planning and I don't think we are planning on a referendum," Government House Leader Mike Farnworth said in discussing the special committee mid-Wednesday afternoon.
The Special Committee on Democratic and Electoral Reform was announced Wednesday (April 9). Consisting of seven members, it will make recommendations around increasing democratic engagement and voter participation with a report due back Nov. 26. The committee will also review the last provincial election based on the official report from Elections BC with a final report including recommendations for improvements due May 14, 2026.
Province-wide referendums on electoral reform failed in 2005, 2009 and 2018. The first two came during the government of former B.C. Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell, the third during the minority government of late premier John Horgan, whose party had campaigned on the issue in 2017.
The first two asked British Columbians whether they wanted to replace the current first-past-the-post system with a single-transferable-vote system. The third essentially amounted to a multiple-choice test when voters had to first decide between the current system and proportional representation, then decide between three versions of proportional representation if they wanted a new system.
Farnworth said looking at different electoral systems could be one way to improve democratic engagement, pointing to declining voter turnout. It was around 58 per cent per cent in 2024, up from 2020 (53.8 per cent) but below 2017 (61.18 per cent). In 2001, voter turnout was almost 71 per cent.
"The Premier (David Eby) has acknowledged that the question in the last referendum was pretty much indecipherable. So the work of the committee will be to have a further look at electoral reform, including proportional representation, but we could look into the way in which to frame a question or path forward."
He also pointed to one possible way to raise democratic engagement: lower the voting age of 16, a move that has already happened in several jurisdictions.
The time has come to just implement this. I don’t prefer PR and instead desire an approval voting system, but folks like me have to be ok not getting what we want.
The outline that this article presents is correct. Citizens assembly, no referendum, just do it. Eby just needs to either not balk and implement it regardless of how it affects his party, or ignore it and push through an alternative system instead. No Trudeau-like dithering, no bizarrely complicated referendums with obscene thresholds. The next BC election should be some new system.
2024 should provide the clarity that this needs to happen now. Too many of the right showed a lack of attention or concern to the barbaric candidates the bc conservatives put up, and just voted because it was the other team. It needs to stop, and it needs to stop now.
Along the lines of just do it, I've heard suggestions of, do it, and have the law say there can be a referendum on it after 2 elections using it.
That way people can see how it works and then decide.
Otherwise it might just turn into every election is about undoing it or keeping it.
Love that idea and I’m going to steal that when discussing that in the future
Approval voting still has strategic voting involved while the single transferable vote and mixed-member proportional do not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_representation
You’re correct that approval voting still has some mechanisms of strategic voting.
The point I was trying to make there is that the objective of “strategic voting” is to accomplish a least-objectionable outcome. And approval voting enables the same objective in a simple and straightforward way.
However you’re correct that it’s absolutely not the only way to accomplish this. And it’s not even the best way to accomplish this objective; as you suggest STV handles this aspect better.
I’ll elaborate a bit on why I like approval voting.
First of all it’s simple, and easy to understand how it works and how the votes are tabulated.
Second, it still preserves the idea of having local representatives. Much like the FPTP system we have now this would force participation in all areas.
Third, it could mean a reduction in negative politics. Because each voter is not zero sum, there is less of a priority of shutting an opposing candidate down. I’m sure it wouldn’t mean the end of negative politics but I believe it would be lessened.
Fourth, it causes the voters to think about each candidate. Not just a team sport where my team is orange and your team is red, but each voter representing the individual mosaic that are their own preferences.
Lastly, I believe this would push the outcomes to the least-objectionable candidates. Going with “least objectionable” is the prevailing strategy of “strategic voting”, and it avoids a scenario such as in the current Nanaimo federal election where the CPC is poised to win despite being the most opposed.
Edit:
Also to reiterate my main point… fuck all those words I just said — if we need to get PR or STV or whatever else I’m on board.
Countries that use proportional representation rank the highest in the international metrics with Canada lagging behind at 14th-18th place.
Again it’s a misnomer that “proportional does not have local representation” that’s only the case for party-lists while the single transferable vote and mixed-member proportional retains the local representation.
https://www.fairvote.ca/factchecklocalrepresentation/
The evidence shows that the places that use proportional representation have less polarization and hostility.
https://www.fairvote.ca/04/11/2023/proportional-representation-decreases-political-polarization/
I don’t believe you can assign that quote to me. Because you’re correct, MMR retains this.
My point wasn’t that PR sucks or is worse in every way, but that it’s one reason I prefer approval voting over systems which don’t have that. I prefer MMR and STV with local representation over implementations of PR that didn’t.
It’s hard to get nuance across in text sometimes. The point I was trying to make is that Approval voting fits my preferences best, but I’d happily support most any system that delivers a replacement to FPTP. Because getting A solution is more important than getting *my favourite solution *