Referendum designed to confuse, giving advantage to proportional representation

Referendum designed to confuse, giving advantage to proportional representation

If it was an honest referendum there would be one clear question and nothing else

Note in the referendum package that there is only one choice for first past the post but under proportional there is three sub choices. I believe that this is done to confuse with the advantage to the proportional side. Why are there not options for FPTP; i.e., runoff to get a clear winner. To decide one must look at who is supporting which option and what is the advantage to them.

If it was an honest referendum there would be one clear question and nothing else. There would also be no dishonest taped robo calls. The one I had stated that the person’s S.E. Asian relative was unable to vote in 1919, something that wouldn’t have happened with proportional rep. I think the response to this is “hog wash.” With proportional rep, there will be times when a politician will be deciding who represents you, and there will be very little chance for independent reps.

I agree that 40 per cent of the vote should not have 100 per cent of the say but until people get serious with making elections work for voters, not political parties, please vote first past the post.

Tony Whiteley

Chemainus