I don't have an alternative to the ward system but I don't think it will solve all the city's electoral problems.Larry Gambone
November 16, 2008 at 11:50 am ·I will be interested to read your alternative to a ward system, Ann. But I think we have to realize that “at large” is a deliberate rigging of the electoral system to favor the more privileged section of the population. Vancouver used to have a ward system, but it was abolished in the late 1930’s when it looked like the CCF could take city hall, since poorer wards outnumbered the wealthy ones four to one.
I'd like to see electoral reform on a Federal and Provincial level more than a Municipal. Nanaimo isn't the same as Regina or Kelowna and while North Nanaimo's issues are very different than the South End's, many residents live and work all over the city and we are electing eight councillors to represent the whole city instead of just one area. The Ward system would regionalise and polarise the city when we're looking for unity.
I like that I have the ability to vote for a good candidate outside of my local area (Fred/Ron), just as I like being able to avoid supporting a poor candidate from my neighbourhood (Angela/James). Just because a candidate lives here won't mean they'll be the best option for Nanaimo.
I'm a strong supporter of Gordon Fuller and Simon Schachner but they would have been my only choice had the Ward system been in place!
I'd like to have my vote count towards the whole of city council and not just one representative. I like my vote to address issues and problems outside of my Ward area. With the Ward system you'd essentially be casting your vote based on the one most significant issue in your area only. (Much like the reactionary voting against Gary Korpan.)
I strongly believe that it's imperative for a community that wants representation to work hard at getting local residents informed and involved. If everyone from the South End voted in support of a candidate addressing South End issues than our voices would have been heard.
These elections should be about issues instead of politicians and their personalities. How we achieve this is up to us all. The southern half of the city is just that- half the city. Our inability to mobilise and make the issues affecting us on a daily level a significant factor in the election says more about us than it does about the electoral system or the politicians. No matter the circumstances each individual's vote carries the same weight.
Let's work together now to make the next election count and work with the current elected councillors until that time.
Posts
3 comments:
I agree that a ward system would not solve all our problems, and that electoral reform at higher levels of government is more important.
The problem is that the present system creates a severe handicap on us, making it extremely difficult to get out the vote for "our side" as you say. The present system was designed precisely to do that.
One way to overcome the problems you mention would be a mixed system, part ward and part at large, so we have our representative and still some say at the general level. (But that is just off the top of my head!)
In order to achieve unity, you have to deal overtly and honestly with the differences between groups. Only then can you reach a rational compromise. The present situation does not allow that, in that one side (North) dominates the other. (South) A ward system would allow the differences to be clarified and then a compromise could be reached. Think of labour-management relations. This is why we have separate employers organizations and trade unions. If both workers and management were in the same organization, the workers would be dominated completely. And compromise is reached between employers and unions, 90% of contracts are reached without a strike. Relations between different socioeconomically based wards ought not to be any different.
Anyway, it is true, lets work with the present council and also toward getting more people involved in the democratic process.
As a CUPW member before my first child's birth I have to wholeheartedly disagree that separate unions for management and workers is to the benefit of the workers. The constant struggle was to the benefit of the employer alone. I was very involved in my local union but I can still see the simple truth of this.
I think it's important to realise that if the South End voter turnout this year had been substantial and unified we could have elected one or two candidates with South End interests at heart. Our handicap is self imposed more than from the outside if only because we are obliged to work with the system that we have right now.
Larry, you speak of unity but then suggest that unity is gained with division. I think the South End should focus on including the North End in the issues we face here. We shouldn't have to fight to swim upstream. Instead we should be getting the city as a whole to fight with us to make the South End a vibrant proactive place it can be.
We need to keep educating residents, candidates and councilors of the issues we face. The weblog is one useful way to get the message out. Pressuring councilors to take an interest and take a role in the solutions will make the changes we wish to see.
To get what we want we have to put aside aspirations to be "right". We have to work with what we have. Ha. I'm envisioning empowering Diana Johnstone and Merv Unger to be a part of the solutions we'd like to see happen in the South End. Persuade them to buy in and take part.
sadly, i do believe that the southend is very, very poorly represented by council, city staff and their policies.
Post a Comment