Vancouver Province
for February 4, 2000

Te Rangiita, New Zealand

I’m very interested in Parliamentary reform. Canada is, however, a lost cause. There is so much dissent in the country at large that changes simply aren’t going to happen. But there is the opportunity for fundamental change in how British Columbians are to govern themselves. Indeed Opposition Leader Gordon Campbell is committed to a public process to that end. Mind you, what politicians say before they are elected and what they do safely in office after winning under the old system are often two different things.

The New Zealand experiment is worth a look. In 1996 they converted their voting system to a mixture of proportional representation and the traditional "first past the post". They’re now with their second government under that system and it would appear the country is ready to revert to the old system. A great pity in my view.

First how it works. There are five seats in the New Zealand devoted to Maoris who elect these members off a special list. This in itself has been controversial in that though the praiseworthy objective was to ensure Maori representation in Parliament, many Maori leaders see this as a way to marginalize their concerns.

The balance of the seats are divided into ½ elected in the "traditional first past the post" method and the other 1/2 off party lists – each party getting the number of MPS off that list as is reflected in the percentage of popular votes they received, it being necessary to get at least 5% to elect a member.

In1996 the National (Conservative Party had the most seats but not enough to form a government. Leader Jim Bolger, after weeks of negotiations, made an improbable alliance with Winston Peters seen by nearly all New Zealanders as "off the wall" in his most lucid moments. This coalition was an unhappy start for the system because it seemed to be a failure at birth.

In 1999 Labour won the most seats but again not enough for a majority and now runs a minority government with partners (though not in formal coalition) including a near left sort of "liberal" party led by another maverick, Jim Anderton and, would you believe, the Green Party.

Now the reaction to all this has been fascinating. Editorialists and writers of letters to the editor, have praised the fact that Mr Bolger (succeeded in mid stream by Jenny Shipley) was restrained from doing all sorts of "right wing things" because he could not, on his own, command a majority in Parliament. These same editorialists and writers of letters are now thanking God that Helen Clark (yes one woman succeeded another, perhaps a world’s first) cannot do way out ‘left wing things" because she too lacks a majority. And here is where the New Zealand paradox comes into play. While New Zealanders seem delighted that MMP (Mixed Member Proportional) has restrained the hard philosophies of the main parties they complain bitterly that "nothing has been done". Just what ought to have been done is somewhat blurred but in any event parliamentarians are seen as not having done anything and therefore wastrels. Now I would argue that politicians not doing anything can be a very good thing if that means that they devote their energies into seeing that the public purse is well cared for. If a sort of MMP in British Columbia would have prevented the BCRIC fiasco and the Fastcats worse fiasco then surely that says much in its favour

If one were to put the British Columbia situation of past years into a New Zealand context, clearly the NDP would not have been able to do a number of things and would have been forced to be much more careful in others. Surely, a minority NDP government (though in fact 1996 would have provided a minority Liberal government under the NZ system) wouldn’t have been able to engineer the Fastcat ferries fiasco and would likely have been forced to think through the Forest Renewal BC undertaking.

. Clearly New Zealanders have fallen into the trap of thinking that a new system would rid them of all problems of governance. It hasn’t. But the absence of fiscal catastrophes and a more powerful and cautious parliament since the system was implemented should, if nothing else, attract the attention of those British Columbians who want not perfection, but just a better system.