In another thread, we're having adebate over voting candidate vs voting party, and how that affects our views re: crossing the foor.
So I just thought of a possible solution to this and would like to hear your views on it.
Let's suppose that on your ballot you can either vote for a candidate or a party, but not both. this would allow parliament to be as PR or candidate oriented as the voters saw fit at any elecction.
All the candidate votes in each riding would function just as they do now [i.e, first past the post (perhaps an exception for visible minorities in the specific case of tied votes], except for no legal recognition or acknowledgement of party affiliation, that being the candidate's personal business.
All the party votes would be tallied across the country, with each party being given one representative to parliament. The candidates would still get one equal-valued vote each as per the current situation, but the party reps would each get one "proportionally-valued" vote. The value of the total candidate votes as a ratio of total party votes would be equal in parliamet as they were at the polls nationwide.
So let's say half of Canadians voted party, then the total value of the party votes would likewise be worth half the votes in parliament. On the other hand, if only 10% of the population voted party, then the total party votes would be worth 10% likewise, with the total candidate vote worth 90%, and so on.
The candidates would each be free to associate or not with whatever party they saw fit, whereas the official party representatives would be chosen by their repective parties and could be replaced by their respective parrties as per the will of the parties' administrations at any time and as often as teh party wished, so as to avoid one person having too much power. One could immagine that if let's say 30% of votes were party votes for teh liberal party, then its representative's one single vote would be worth 30% of the total parliamentary vote. So to ensure he follows party policy, the party would reserve the right to replace him at any time.
I beleive such a system would also solve the problem of partisans being ticked off at those who exercise theri right to cross the floor, while still giving the rest of us the right to grant our candidate autonomy from any party affiliation, thus recognising his right to associate as he sees fit to.
What would be your thoughts on this?
The secondary parliament would be for those who voted for a party rather than a candidate.
So I just thought of a possible solution to this and would like to hear your views on it.
Let's suppose that on your ballot you can either vote for a candidate or a party, but not both. this would allow parliament to be as PR or candidate oriented as the voters saw fit at any elecction.
All the candidate votes in each riding would function just as they do now [i.e, first past the post (perhaps an exception for visible minorities in the specific case of tied votes], except for no legal recognition or acknowledgement of party affiliation, that being the candidate's personal business.
All the party votes would be tallied across the country, with each party being given one representative to parliament. The candidates would still get one equal-valued vote each as per the current situation, but the party reps would each get one "proportionally-valued" vote. The value of the total candidate votes as a ratio of total party votes would be equal in parliamet as they were at the polls nationwide.
So let's say half of Canadians voted party, then the total value of the party votes would likewise be worth half the votes in parliament. On the other hand, if only 10% of the population voted party, then the total party votes would be worth 10% likewise, with the total candidate vote worth 90%, and so on.
The candidates would each be free to associate or not with whatever party they saw fit, whereas the official party representatives would be chosen by their repective parties and could be replaced by their respective parrties as per the will of the parties' administrations at any time and as often as teh party wished, so as to avoid one person having too much power. One could immagine that if let's say 30% of votes were party votes for teh liberal party, then its representative's one single vote would be worth 30% of the total parliamentary vote. So to ensure he follows party policy, the party would reserve the right to replace him at any time.
I beleive such a system would also solve the problem of partisans being ticked off at those who exercise theri right to cross the floor, while still giving the rest of us the right to grant our candidate autonomy from any party affiliation, thus recognising his right to associate as he sees fit to.
What would be your thoughts on this?
The secondary parliament would be for those who voted for a party rather than a candidate.