The News Rundown

B.C. cabinet confirms format of electoral reform referendum

Once again, we return to the issue of the electoral referendum in BC. The referendum voting period is expected to run from October 22, 2018 until November 30, 2018. On Episode 66, I talked about how the BC NDP were stacking the deck in favour of proportional representation by appointing the partisan Attorney General David Eby to be the "neutral arbiter", seeking advice from academics who favour PR, not releasing information about the referendum, and how they hadn't set a question or procedure yet for the referendum.
Just on Thursday we got news that John Horgan's BC cabinet has accepted the recommendations made by Eby (himself being one of Horgan's top cabinet ministers) on how the referendum on a new electoral system in B.C. would work. Eby’s report to cabinet recommended two separate questions for people to vote on.
The questions are:
Which should British Columbia use for elections to the Legislative Assembly?

The current First Past the Post voting system
A proportional representation voting system

If British Columbia adopts a proportional representation voting system, which of the following voting systems do you prefer?

Dual Member Proportional (DMP)
Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)
Rural-Urban PR

Eby's office labeled what he called four key principles to adhere to that were central to people's patterns on the questionnaire. Local representation, Simplicity, No increase in MLA numbers, and the system being "generally proportional" to voting patterns as long as it doesn't contradict the other three. By far, the most widely wanted aspect of voting was simplicity and having a system that's easy to understand. Let's talk about the 3 proposed systems and see if they fill that requirement.
The report describes Dual Member Proportional as a system that preserves the size of rural ridings as single member districts, but increasing urban ridings to twice the size and having 2 members elected, one by winning the most vote in a district as in FPTP, and the other allocated based on province-wide voting results and the individual district results. How that 2nd member is chosen is not exactly clear. DMP has not been but into use before in the world, as it was invented in 2013 by a University of Alberta mathematics student, which means it's inclusion on a referendum is curious.
Mixed Member Proportional is a system where ridings would again increase in size, and combines single-member electoral districts elected under FPTP with List PR seats allocated on a provincial level. The overall share of seats each party holds in the Legislative Assembly is determined by the party’s share of the province-wide vote it receives. Candidates who fill the List PR seats are either elected directly or allocated from the parties’ lists of candidates to compensate for any disproportional results from the FPTP vote.
Rural-Urban PR consists of multi-member districts with seats filled using the Single Transferable Vote (STV) in urban and semi-urban areas and MMP in the most rural areas STV means that if a riding does not achieve a candidate with a majority 50% vote total, the lowest ranked ballots are removed, and their 2nd option is then counted..In the MMP regions under Rural-Urban PR, a small number of List PR seats are filled proportionally on a regional basis in order to provide some proportionality for these regions. It would mean mega ridings with between two and seven MLAs, which means there could be anywhere from five or six candidates on the ballot to over 20.
Confused? I've studied these systems in Political Science classes and the last time referendums were brought up in 2009. None of these systems are easy to understand, and they don't make it clear as to what candidate you're actually voting for.
There have already been criticisms about the proposed electoral systems. Both Dual Member Proportional and Rural-Urban have never been used before. Elections BC will also not be providing electoral maps that would be used to elect members under the proposed proportional representation systems.
Liberal leader Andrew Wilkinson said that “They are trying to blow this past British Columbians, they are not even going to tell them what riding they will be in. The ridings will be changing dramatically, people won’t know where to cast their vote or who their representative will be. The NDP want them to just take it on blind faith.”
The government says that it released the proposed questions so that any changes by cabinet would be publicly known. Horgan released a statement saying “Today, cabinet accepted the recommendations of the Attorney General on how the referendum on a new voting system will take place. Regulations are being prepared and the government will ask Elections BC to review the question, to ensure that the language used is clear and simple to understand. This is an historic opportunity to replace our old voting system with a new way of voting that works for people. We look forward to public debate and lively campaigns on both sides. Ultimately, the people will decide.” So it's clear even from the government's statement that they aren't hiding that they want to have proportional representation.
This contradicts what Horgan said just a few weeks ago, when asked about the lack of information he said there is no particular rush. “We are months and months away. There’s summer between us and the vote. I’m fairly certain there won’t be too many summer barbecues where the topic of conversation is proportional representation. People will be enjoying their summer. They’ll be getting on with their lives.”
Some of the information in the 114 page report was quite interesting. Roughly 180 000 people visited the government's How We Vote website, and just over half of those people completed the questionnaire asking about voting preferences. Roughly 50% of people prefered to have 1 MLA per district, 60% say that there should not be an increase in MLAs, 62% believe that MLAs should do what their constituents want over their parties' wishes, and more (48 to 42) believed in having a small amount of big parties over many little ones. 56% disagree that a ballot should give voters lots of choices, even if it’s less clear how votes get turned into seats. Similarly, 60% believe that an election ballot should be easy to understand, even if it means voters have fewer options to express their preferences.
54% believed there should be no public funds allocated to campaign groups for each referendum side. A huge majority (70-80) believe there should be campaign spending limits, government impartial information released about each option, and that campaign ads should be only allowed if groups release their name in the ad and disclose their donors and contributors. There was no clear majority on how many PR versions should be on the ballot, or even what types of PR should be included.

We have taken back Ontario': Doug Ford leads PCs to majority government

This past Thursday Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives won a majority government with 76 seats.
The NDP took Official Opposition status with 40.
The Liberals were reduced to third party with 7 seats.
Of note, the Ontario Greens also elected their first member in Guelph.
The PCs captured 40.49% of the vote, the NDP 33.57%, the Liberals 19.59%, and the Greens 4.6%.
Voter turnout was highest since 1999 at 58%.
In Ford’s victory speech he said, "My friends, this victory belongs to you. This victory belongs to the people. And tonight, the people of Ontario have spoken. "I promised to deliver a strong, stable majority government and together we did that. Together we made history. We have taken back Ontario, we have delivered a government that is for the people… Tonight we have a sent a clear message to the world: Ontario is open for business.“
Short after the results came in numerous pundits and groups began asking questions about proportional representation.
The Broadbent Institute Tweeted: Doug Ford’s PC win tonight in Ontario proves the major fault in our electoral system. This would never have happened with Proportional Representation... But democracy stretches beyond the ballot box. That 58% who wants a more progressive future for Ontario have an even more critical role to play now.
The talk also continued with election night pundits on the various TV channels as well as online on Twitter, Reddit, and Facebook.
The PC victory is due to a strong showing in the 905 area and the Greater Toronto Area where the Liberals were almost completely wiped out.
The Liberals at 7 seats will lose official party status. This means they lose a good deal of funding used to set up constituency offices and will receive less question time in the house.
Surprisingly Kathleen Wynne won her seat in Don Valley West by 181 votes.
She later announced that she was resigning that evening as leader of the Liberal party.
In other interesting notes:

Mike Harris Jr, son of former Premier Mike Harris won a seat in Kitchener Conestoga.
Caroline Mulroney, daughter of former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney won a seat in York Simcoe.
Christine Elliott, former leadership contender and widow of federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty won a seat in Newmarket-Aurora.
Gurratan Singh, brother of federal NDP leader Jagmeet Singh won a seat in Brampton East

Bloc Québécois leader Martine Ouellet is resigning on June 11th after a crushing vote of non-confidence. Ouellet only received 32% support from party members in a conference vote held last weekend over the phone and on the internet. Ouellet had said previously that she believed getting the support of 50 percent plus one would give her the legitimacy to stay on as head of the party, but was unable to reach even the lowest threshold of a majority.
In late February, 7 of 10 MPs quit the party to form a new party tentatively called Quebec Debout. That new name translates to "Quebec Standing Up", and as in the name, the group is meant to stand up for Quebec on the federal stage without focusing so heavily on separatism. Its members say they no longer believe it's their job to promote Quebec separatism at the federal level, but to work within Canada to promote Quebec's interests.
The Bloc's youth wing and one of the three remaining MPs also withdrew their support of Ouellet, who has been criticized for being uncompromising and for focusing too sharply on Quebec independence instead of defending the province's interests on the federal scene. Ouellet blamed the MPs who left the party directly for the failure of Quebec separatism: "The biggest obstacle of the realization of [a] republic of Quebec is internally. That is not normal. The movement is kind of sick."
Ouellet also brushed aside criticism of her leadership style and defended her decision to be a vocal promoter of an independent Quebec as leader and said she thinks she received more backlash because she's a woman with sovereigntist views. She said "I'm not perfect. I will never say I'm perfect. But if I compare myself with other male leaders, they are not [either.] And I would say a lot of them are more imperfect but they didn't receive as much attack as me. When you don't know what to say you, you say it's the style."
However, in the conference vote, 65% voted in favour of whether the party should focus on promoting Quebec independence on a daily basis, which means that the party membership didn't disagree with Ouellet's view of sovereigntism, just Ouellet herself.
Since the vote on June 3rd and with news of Ouellet resigning, two of the MPs who broke away, Michel Boudrias and Simon Marcil, will return to the party, however the remaining 5 will remain separate. Rheal Fortin, one of the five MPs and Quebec Debout's spokesperson said today the decision to not return was based on Bloc members voting last weekend to make Quebec independence front and centre of the party's daily discussion.
It remains uncertain how the BQ civil war will affect politics in Quebec. The next provincial election in Quebec is slated for October this year, so it's possible this drama could have an impact on the Parti Quebecois, and their quest to form government, and right now they are trailing in the polls to the governing Liberal Party and the centre-right Coalition Avenir Quebec.
Separatism in Quebec has been on the downtrend for awhile, with younger people more often than in the 90s wanting to stay in Canada. The PQ and BQ parties have both been on a sharp decline since the earlier part of the decade, with the BQ being almost wiped out in the 2011 federal election and the PQ being defeated in the 2012 provincial election to return to the opposition benches. We will see later this year if voters still believe there is a place for separatism in Quebec.

The Firing Line

Soldiers ordered to return sleeping bags, rucksacks due to 'shortfall of equipment'

On May 28th a Canadian Forces General Order was sent out that commanded all military personnel to return rucksacks and sleeping bags.
The order reads, “IN ORDER TO REDISTRIBUTE MATERIEL WHERE IT IS NEEDED MOST AND IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS RECRUITMENT INITIATIVES, THE CANADIAN ARMY, AS THE OPI FOR COMMON LAND BASED EQUIPMENT, WILL BE CONDUCTING A RECALL OF RUCKSACKS AND SLEEPING BAG SYSTEMS”
The order goes on to illustrate the reason for recall, “THIS CANFORGEN FURTHER RESTRICTS THE SOI (SCALES OF ISSUE) FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS UNTIL THERE IS NO LONGER A SHORTFALL OF EQUIPMENT”
Members who are deployed or could be deployed on short notice are allowed to keep their equipment.
The military attributes this to “successful recruiting initiatives” and personnel moving into areas that no longer need this type of equipment or won’t be deployed as often according to Canadian Armed Forces spokesperson Lt. Col. Andre E. Salloum.
Salloum contradicts the order and says that this is not due to a shortfall but the order as reproduced clearly indicates a shortfall.
According to the Ministry of Defence, the government spent $2.3b less than planned on new military gear in 2017.
Defence Minister Sajjan linked this to savings found on specific projects or companies not fulfilling their contractual obligations.
Dave Perry, a senior analyst with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute said, “They’re going to great lengths to make sure that they’re using literally every last option other than spending taxpayer dollars. A lot of the times it’s faster to do these kinds of internal reorganizations rather than do what you or I would do, which is just go buy one new if you needed a sleeping bag… especially if the ones that you have are from the eighties.”
Dave Perry feels that this may be the case because of the extensive amount of red tape needed to have the government actually buy something new.
Meanwhile Canada announced in February that we’d be providing an additional $2b in general foreign aid over the next 5 years.
Totalling this up with the money already allocated to the Ministry of Defence equals $4.3b.
As of 2017 Canada has roughly 80,000 active personnel in the military combined with roughly 33,000 reservists.
Doing some simple shopping and assuming extravagant rucksacks and sleeping bags plus the cost of government, an estimate of $100 per rucksack isn’t too bad.
The military could buy new rucksacks and sleeping bags for all active service members for just $8 million.
This story only appeared in CTV and wasn’t replicated anywhere else.
For a story as major as the Canadian Forces not being able to supply the soldiers due to a “shortfall” it should have received a lot more coverage than it did.

Word of the Week

Majority - a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total

How to Find Us
Westerncontext.ca

westerncontext.ca/subscribe

twitter.com/westerncontext

facebook.com/westerncontext

Show Data

Episode Title: Voting Produces Results

Teaser: The BC Government sets the questions for the electoral referendum, The Ontario PCs win a majority, and BQ leader Martine Ouellet resigns causing uncertainty in Quebec. Also, a lack of information on the military’s supposed shortfall of sleeping bags.

Recorded Date: June 9, 2018

Release Date: June 10, 2018

Duration: 45:06

Edit Notes: BC cut out, Ontario cut out

Podcast Summary Notes

Duration: XX:XX