do you think of a voting system where you can win by encouraging
some of your supporters not to vote for you? That's one of
flaws with BC-STV.
of BC-STV like to say that it insults the intelligence of
B.C. voters to say that the system is complex. Tell that to
the mathematicians who investigated what's called the "non-monotonicity"
means not decreasing as support increases, or not increasing
as support decreases. Mathematicians have demonstrated that
STV is non-monotonic. Proponents of STV claim it has not spread
because evil politicians are out to kill it. In reality, rational
people have rejected it because it is a fundamentally flawed
system where the winners can change with random changes in
rankings or a shuffling of the ballots in a recount. The counting
system is so complex that it is virtually impossible to take
actual vote counts and analyze how vulnerable they are to
changes in outcome due to improvements in rankings. Those
who understand the system know that election campaigns can
be focused so as to exploit the counting weakness.
British Columbians are probably more inclined to reject BC-STV
because of its outrageous elimination of local representation
in favour of regional representation, rather than because
the vote count is non-monotonic.
BC-STV Kamloops would be part of Cariboo-Thompson, an enormous
5-MLA electoral area reaching from Quesnel to the U.S. border,
an area of 141,000 sq. km. - twice the size of Ireland; voters
would have one vote to elect 5 MLAs for the region. Voters
in Quesnel would be in the same electoral area as voters in
Penticton. Voters in Tofino would be in the same electoral
area as voters in Powell River. Voters in the West End would
be in the same electoral area as voters in Kerrisdale.
at the map and seeing what BC-STV would do to communities,
is likely to turn many British Columbians against BC-STV.
Those who prefer mathematics over maps will reject it because
its counting system is fundamentally flawed.