Al, I believe your view that the idea of party's selecting list candidates is no different from the backroom wangling that selects riding candidates now is correct. Maybe it is because you are a Buchanan era Nova Scotian that you appreciate this point, but it is as true under our current system as it would be under a new one. Party hacks will always meddle in the selection of candidates. The difference is that, in my opinion, the MMP list processes legitemizes the meddling. Enjoy your trip to the ballot box!

Thanks Hans. It was particularly nice voting today without having my name shouted out as in South Rustico PEI - so that the panels of party hacks could write down my name to later figure out who got the jobs and other perks.

So it's you, Sinister Greg, and my dad for MMP.

Me and my mom against.

So far, MMP is winning, right at its 60% threshold. :-)

I like the underdog and will be voting for MMP as well.

Ben, keep in mind that the deck is so stacked against MMP as to be almost insurmountable:

1) MMP? Come on, couldn't they come up with something catchy for this?
2) To pass, it requres a 60% majority in 60% of the ridings. Good bloody luck.

Unfortunately, I'll be out cancelling your MMP vote Al: it looks too much like a way to pack the the house with hacks to me. A better fix would have been runoff elections, like the French presidency. Ah well.

It is, yes.

But if it breaks 50%, that's enough that electoral reform should stay on the agenda.

I don't really want it -- I like the system as it is -- so I voted against.

MMP! MMP! MMP! MMP!

How do you pronounce the acronym? Try saying "mop" without the "o"! Like eating a cup of peanut butter and shouting at the same time.

MMP! MMP! MMP! MMP!

Well, I'm voting against because I honestly think that if a party wishes more representation in the house, they'll do the logical thing and modify their platform to meet the wishes of more of the people, duh... If not, well, that's evolution for you ya silly political mastodons. Stamping around and whining that you deserve something because your opinions have the support of 20% of the populous doesn't change the fact that 80% DON'T share them, and that we DO live in a parliamentary democracy.

And as far as WHO parties pick to represent them, good golly folks, if you want to have a voice in policies and candidate choice, buy a membership and show up at the occasional monthly party meeting, to the AGM and maybe volunteer to sit in a committee or two, they are always looking for people. You can't be part of the process if you aren't part of the process.

Hear! Hear! Well spoken Sean!

Majoritarian blinders must be on sale.

Screw the demand that you become a hack to have a say. Bring on the primary system.

Alan, keep in mind that there can be a vast difference between having a say and having been seen to have a say.

Not all people who participate in constituency work are hacks. Primaries won't get rid of the hack class, though -- if anything, it'll multiply the people in it. (And then they'll <i>breed</i>...)

But yes, a primary system is better...

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaccccks! Iyeeeeeeeee! They are everywhere!!!

I hate hatedom.

Al's raving's aside, a great political reform in Canada would involve pushing more power toward members rather than powers. A lot of this has to do with economics, of course. For example, be it resolved that the goverment should fully refund a candidate's expenses (up to some limit) if they get more than 10% of the vote in their district.

I like David's suggestion that you get a refund of expenses up to a point if you get 10% of the vote (or so). Money is what kept my campaign for a counsel seat quite embarrassingly bare bones all those years ago...

I think one of the reasons our provincial, and federal MPs and MPPs have been so, well, alike over the years is frankly because only the wealthy can afford to run, and in Canada, that means lawyers and business people and their like minded cronies.

Or the double-threat combo of lawyers who are businesspeople. Like Brian Mulroney, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, John Tory...

But imagine if politically bent bloggers were elected instead? They'd spend more time justifying what they wrote online the night before and trying to prevent charges of libel that they'd never be able to help ghost write their own wikipedia entries let alone get anything concrete decided in the legislature.

Though I write from the Left Coast I still don't have the final results on the MMMMMPPPPP, (Mmmm Pee).

List systems favour the entrenched. Which, oddly enough, makes them less democratic than first past the post systems. Straight PR would have the same problem with major parties but would be entertaining at the margins.

I must admit it was rather sweet watching John Tory go down to party and personal defeat.

Time for a real conservative you Ontario wussies. Funding madrassas indeed.

The Orange Lodge vote was not amused.

"The CBC reported at 10 p.m. that 36.8% of Ontario voters were in favour and 63.2% against in votes that had been counted so far."

Not even close. Clowns to be elected directly rather than picked by the ringmasters.