Canadian Press: B.C. voters on Tuesday can choose the status quo or the STV

VANCOUVER, B.C. — Maintain the status quo - or be an electoral pioneer?

British Columbia voters could make Canadian history and join a small coterie of jurisdictions elsewhere in the world, depending on the referendum decision they make on their ballot Tuesday.

Voters' ballots for the provincial election will contain not only the names of the candidates in their riding, but also a crucial referendum question.

Electors will choose 85 MLAs and a new government - but they also will see a question similar to one on their ballots in the May 2005 election.

Their answers will determine the degree of satisfaction with British Columbia's current first-past-the-post system of electing MLAs - the system used in every other jurisdiction in Canada.

Or will they opt for something new - the STV or single transferable vote method?

In
the last election, the question on the ballot read: "Should British Columbia change to the BC-STV electoral system as recommended by the
Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform?"

This time, voters will be asked: "Which electoral system should British Columbia use to elect members to the provincial Legislative Assembly?

There will be two choices:

-The existing electoral system (First-Past-the-Post)

-The single transferable vote electoral system (BC-STV) proposed by the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform

If STV passes it will be used for the next election in May 2013 and voters' ballots will be much different looking.

British Columbians would be a part of a group of electoral pioneers, joining the Republic of Ireland, Malta, Tasmania and a few other jurisdictions
who have adopted the STV system.

Under STV, the number of MLAs elected would stay the same - 85 - but the number of ridings would decrease to about 20.

So the number of MLAS elected in each riding would increase to between two and seven, depending on the population of the riding, or district.

For
example, Metro Vancouver now has 11 ridings. Under STV it will be divided into two: Vancouver East and Vancouver West, but will still elect 11 MLAs.

But there will also be a lot of names on the ballot and voters will have to rank them in order of personal preference - 1, 2, 3 and so on.

Winners secure a seat after they amass a quota of the popular vote. If the winner gets more votes than he or she needs to meet that quota, then his or her surplus ballots are distributed to the voters' second choice until a second candidate meets the threshold, and so on.

That counting continues until all seats in the riding are filled.

The independent Referendum Information Office (RIO) estimates that a district that will elect five MLAs would likely have between 12 and 18
candidates on the ballot.

Although 57.6 per cent of voters endorsed STV in the May 2005 provincial election, it needed 60 per cent of the popular vote and more than 50 per cent of the votes in at least 51 of the province's 85 electoral districts to pass.

That's the case this time, too.

The referendum office has described STV as a system designed to produce "a fairly proportional result - that is, the number of seats a political
party wins will be close to its share of the overall popular vote."

British Columbians have likely seen ads by opponents and proponent groups.

In their own words, No-STV says the current system is "easy to understand - the candidate with the most votes wins and represents one single
riding. The party that wins the most ridings forms government."

"But the Single Transferable Vote would create giant ridings of up to seven members of the legislative assembly representing over 300,000 people -losing local accountability and responsibility of MLAs to voters."

British Columbians for BC-STV say the current system is "flawed. It cheats British Columbians of the governments they vote for."

"As a result, voters are unable to effectively hold governments accountable. We end up with extreme policy swings, partisan
polarization and instability. There are no extenuating circumstances or unique strengths that justify our continued use of this failed system."

Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.