By Kyla Pearson
It is a historic opportunity for Ontario’s 8.5 million registered voters to change the face of representation at Queen’s Park. But with less than two weeks until the Oct. 10 vote, the referendum on electoral reform seems to be relatively unnoticed by the public.
Justine Boyd says she knows “absolutely nothing” about the impending vote. She is not alone.
In a random survey of 25 people along Bank Street, nearly half says they didn’t know a referendum was taking place, while several others say they had heard about it, but knew nothing of the issue.
Marg and Ron Dacey were the exception. They were the only two individuals surveyed who says they felt well enough informed to cast their ballot in the upcoming vote.
“I don’t think [the referendum] has been very well advertised, but we knew about it and we made a point of finding out more,” says Marg.
Both say they plan to vote against the proposed electoral reforms.
A “no” vote means maintaining the province’s current first-past-the-post electoral system in favour of a move to a mixed member proportional system (MMP).
The MMP system would have Ontarians casting two votes in future provincial elections – one for a local candidate and one for the political party of their choice.
“We’re talking about changing the way this province is governed, which will effect us for decades,” says Peter Black, Ottawa campaign manager of Vote for MMP.
Advocates and opponents both agree that lack of public awareness is of great concern.
“[The referendum] is the more important vote,” says Graham Sproule, Ottawa regional director of No MMP. “There’s a lack of information for voters, even just in terms of making them aware that this is coming up.”
While the referendum is news to many, Ontario is not the first province to attempt to transform its election process.
In 2005, both British Columbia and Prince Edward Island asked voters to reconsider their first-past-the-post electoral systems. In a plebiscite, over 60 per cent of P.E.I. voters rejected a proposed MMP system. In B.C. however, the proposed single-transferable-vote system nearly passed, garnering majority support in 77 of the province’s 79 ridings but falling just short of the 60 per cent total votes needed for approval.
Back on Bank Street, a handful of individuals say they have just learned of the referendum and they intend to research it further.
When surveyed, Tyson Everitt says the referendum had become his focus.
“I’ve only just become aware of it and I’ve read the pamphlet, but I’m not too sure where I sit right now.”
The pamphlet is one that Elections Ontario has distributed to households across the province as a part of its $6.8 million public information campaign.
Other publicity platforms by Elections Ontario include a website dedicated to the referendum, a toll-free information line, as well as television, radio and newspaper campaigns.
Still, professor Rand Dyck, an academic advisor to the Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform, says the profile of the referendum must increase if it is to compete with the provincial election.
“Now that we’re into the campaigns, people focus more on leaders, promises, charges and counter-charges,” says Dyck.
While he plans to vote yes, Dyck says lack of interest and awareness in the referendum could ultimately lead to the MMP proposal’s defeat.
“I’m guessing that if people don’t know much about it, they’re likely to vote against it,” says Dyck. “People will opt for the devil they know.”
That is why getting the word out on MMP is paramount to the 104-member Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform, says Tara Currie, the assembly member from Ottawa-Centre. The group spent months evaluating electoral systems before proposing MMP as a new model for Queen’s Park.
“I don’t think any of us took this task lightly,” says Currie. “We really wanted to make the best decision.”
Across the province, assembly alumni are holding public speaking events to raise awareness.
While MMP was approved by an overwhelming majority in the assembly, Currie says what is most important is that people know all the pros and cons so that, when the time comes, they can make an “informed decision.”