175
During the campaign, the party leaders made daily promises at manufactured-for-the-media photo opportunities and tried to get the voters to focus on the issues the leaders wished to stress. These were not necessarily the issues that the voters wanted them to talk about.
Globeandmail.com invited readers to tell us what issues concerned you most during the Ontario election.
Each week during the campaign, our editors picked one of your submissions and then prepared a special weekly online report that included the party platforms on the issue and — where appropriate — background information, online reference materials, what the outside experts think, photographs, audio and visual material to help you understand the issue better.
Electoral reform and the referendum
The following readers were among the many who suggested the referendum as a topic they wanted to see debated:
Chris B., Ottawa, writes: The referendum needs wide debate. It is the only truly substantive choice on the ballot. Change the way we do politics and we change politics in the province.
S.K., Toronto, writes: My issue is the referendum — changing the voting system. There has been little explanation coming out of the province. What is the recommendation? What is the implication of the recommendation? How do the parties stand on the recommendation? Why are they silent?
May Spence writes: I want to see a debate on the vote for proportional representation. Guaranteed most people know absolutely nothing about it. I for one will vote no. . .
In April, an independent assembly of citizens set up by the Ontario government voted overwhelmingly to have a referendum on replacing the current first-past-the-post election system with a "made-in-Ontario" proportional representation system modelled on those used in Germany and New Zealand.
The referendum — the first in Ontario since 1921 — asked the electorate to choose between the status quo and a new system called mixed member proportional representation (MMP).
The MMP system — which the citizens' assembly recommended after seven months of study and consultation — would ensure that each party's share of seats in the legislature would be roughly equal to its share of the popular vote.
To be approved in this referendum, the new system must get the support of at least 60 per cent of voters province-wide, and it must also be approved by the majority of electors in at least 60 per cent of all ridings — a high threshold criticized by proponents of MMP who argue the vote is stacked against reform.
• Voters would get two votes: One for a local candidate and a second for a party.
• Each party would nominate local candidates and a "party list" of candidates for the entire province, in the order it wants them to be elected
• Up for grabs are 129 seats in the legislature
• 90 MPPs would be elected from local ridings. [There are 107 now]
• 39 MPPs would be elected from the party lists, based on each party's share of the total party vote. (The party must meet a minimum threshold of 3 per cent of all ballots cast to be eligible)
• Example: Imagine a legislature with 100 seats. If the Globe Party receives 25 per cent of the party vote, it is entitled to about 25 seats. If it elects only 20 local members, the top five members from the Globe's party list are elected, rounding off its total share of seats in the legislature to 25 per cent.
Proponents say election results will better reflect the wishes of voters, and thus encourage more people to vote. Under the current system, majority governments are often elected without a majority of voter support. Smaller or marginal parties usually receive less than their fair share of seats. With two choices on the ballot, voters will be able to vote for their preferred local candidate and support a separate provincial party, if they so desire. Party lists would open up the nomination process to more women and minorities.
Opponents say proportional representation systems often result in unstable minority or coalition governments that get bogged down in negotiation and take longer to make important decisions. Smaller parties, including marginal players, have far more say and influence. Ridings will be larger, resulting in less public access to MPPs. Governing is moved to the backrooms, where deals are struck. Meanwhile, the current system is easily understood, historical, and election results usually reflects voters' wishes, they argue.
NDP Leader Howard Hampton supports proportional representation, although he has warned that MMP would further enlarge Northern Ontario's already huge provincial ridings. The Liberals and Conservatives have yet to take an official position. But Conservative Leader John Tory has criticized it, saying MPPs should be directly accountable to the voters. He argues proportional representation undercuts the link between voters and legislators. Green Party Leader Frank De Jong supports the new system because it would "improve all politics."
Political science professor Peter Woolstencroft, who opposes the new system, and proponent Joe Murray, president of VoteForMMP.ca, took your questions and debated the issue.
Globeandmail.com readers also discussed the referendum with each other.
Elections Ontario: On the referendum
Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform
Vote for MMP: Proponents of new system
No MMP: Opponents of new system
Full text: 
