Skip to content

Column: Why is changing the electoral system so easy?

One of the basic rules set out in B.C.’s Strata Property Act — which typically comes up during an annual general meeting — is that a strata corporation may amend bylaws through a three-quarters vote of owners.
Mike Klassen
Mike Klassen

One of the basic rules set out in B.C.’s Strata Property Act — which typically comes up during an annual general meeting — is that a strata corporation may amend bylaws through a three-quarters vote of owners. In other words, a simple majority is deemed insufficient to make changes that could have potentially significant impacts on property owners.

A similar rule applies in the Cooperative Association Act, which requires the votes of three quarters of co-op members on a range of items before they can be approved, and B.C.’s new Society’s Act, which mandates any special resolutions require a two-thirds vote. As well, most electoral organizations or political parties also demand the approval by at least two thirds of voting members to revise bylaws.

Now, contrast this practice of using a supermajority to enact systemic change to the ground rules the B.C. government has set out for a fall referendum on how we elect our MLAs. In that vote — which proposes to permanently change the way we have elected our legislators throughout almost all of B.C.’s history — a simple majority (50% plus one) of the votes cast will suffice to change our system.

The vote will take place this October via mail-in ballot and, if as few as 30% of voters cast ballots in the referendum, as some have suggested could happen, this means that as little as 15% of voters will choose the electoral system for 100% of British Columbians.

If you think the B.C. government has carelessly cast aside the usual checks and balances governing systemic change, you are in good company.

The words of veteran newspaper columnists Vaughn Palmer and Michael Smyth drip with cynicism over the government’s decision. The Province’s Smyth calls it a political version of a Three Card Monte street hustle, using a “phoney public-relations exercise to make the game look fair.” The Vancouver Sun’s Palmer on whether the voting system has been rigged to ensure its outcome: “I would be shocked — shocked — if anyone drew that conclusion.”

There is no question voters are jaded by politics and demanding change. Donald Trump and, now, Doug Ford are symptoms of that frustration, though each will ultimately be held to account by voters through our present electoral systems.

In a legislature divided up by proportional representation (PR), populist politicians gain power.

Is institutionalizing populism through electoral change the answer? Many argue that improving the system you have is better than trading it in for another.

In Europe, “hung parliaments,” where governments elected by PR take hundreds of days to form, are commonplace. Canadian elections, by contrast, ensure reliable transitions of government.

Is democracy on steroids what citizens want, or that local voices are better represented in government? Perhaps we should take a look at practical reforms put forward by a trio of federal MPs in Turning Parliament Inside Out, a book co-authored by Michael Chong (Conservative), Kennedy Stewart (NDP) and Scott Simms (Liberal).

There are many things to consider as the government forges ahead with its referendum plan. But it is fair to ask if a 75% vote is needed to change a strata bylaw, why is 50% plus one adequate to change B.C.’s whole electoral system?

Mike Klassen is a senior strategic communications and public affairs professional, and civic affairs columnist with Vancouver Courier.
mike@mikeklassen.net • @MikeKlassen