Transcript: Hospitals and Electricity | Jun 26, 2005

The opening sequence rolls.

Music plays as clips of politicians and demonstrations appear on an animated number 4.

Steve says THIS WEEK ON "FOURTH
READING," HEALTH CARE WINNERS?
HOSPITALS GET THREE-YEAR
FUNDING, BUT IS IT ENOUGH?

Steve sits in the studio 3 guests.

Steve is in his mid-forties, clean-shaven, with short curly brown hair. He's wearing a gray suit and a gray polo T-shirt.

Steve says HI, EVERYBODY.
I'M STEVE PAIKIN AND WELCOME TO
"FOURTH READING."
ONTARIO'S HOSPITALS GOT A
LONG-AWAITED WISH FROM THE
LIBERAL GOVERNMENT THIS WEEK.
HEALTH MINISTER GEORGE
SMITHERMAN ANNOUNCED HOSPITALS
WILL KNOW THEIR FUNDING LEVELS
FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
ORDINARILY, HOSPITALS LIKE OTHER
INSTITUTIONS IN THE PROVINCE,
ARE FUNDED ON A YEAR-TO-YEAR
BASIS.
IT IS NOT KNOWN, THOUGH,
WHETHER THE MONEY WILL STAVE
OFF THE 4,000 LAYOFFS THAT O.S
H.A. PRESIDENT HILLARY SHORT
HAS BEEN WARNING ABOUT.
MULTIYEAR HOSPITAL FUNDING.
IS IT REALLY GOING TO MAKE A
DIFFERENCE IN OUR HEALTH CARE
SYSTEM?
LET'S FIND OUT FROM SEAN
CONWAY, JANET ECKERD, AND DAVE
COOKE, THE FORMER N.D.P.
CABINET MINISTER.
JANET, I WANT TO GO TO YOU
FIRST SINCE YOU ARE ON A
HOSPITAL BOARD.
DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO
KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY YOU'RE
GETING FROM THE PROVINCIAL
GOVERNMENT, NOT JUST THIS YEAR,
BUT THREE YEARS IN THE FUTURE?

A caption reads "Janet Ecker. Former PC Cabinet Minister."

Janet is in her late forties, with short straight blond hair. She wears glasses, a cream suit, floral top and a gold brooch.

Janet says YES, IT DOES.
IT ALLOWS THE HOSPITAL TO HAVE
A PLAN.
IT'S GOOD THAT THEY'RE DOING
IT, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE FIRST
ONE THAT DID IT.
MY BUDGET HAD DONE IT AND DONE
PREVIOUSLY BY PREVIOUS
GOVERNMENTS.
TO PUT IT OUT FOR MULTI-YEARS
ALLOWS THE HOSPITAL MANAGER,
C.E.O. TO SAY, OK, I CAN START
PLANNING TO CHANGE PROGRAMMES,
FOR SAVINGS HERE, IMPROVEMENTS
THERE.
IT IS A VERY, VERY GOOD THING
AND THE QUESTION WILL BE,
THOUGH, CAN THEY STICK TO IT?

Steve says THAT TAKES ME NEXT
WITH SEAN.
I THINK BEFORE YOU DID AND THE
PETERSON GOVERNMENT MADE -- I
REMEMBER THEM ROLLING OUT SOME
FANTASTIC FIVE-YEAR MULTIYEAR
FUNDING FOR HOSPITALS AND THE
ONLY THING THAT DIDN'T PLAN WAS
THE GOVERNMENT'S DEFEAT.
SO, I WONDER WHETHER OR NOT
THESE MULTIYEAR COMMITMENTS ARE
WORTH ANYTHING WHEN, IF YOU
LOSE, THE NEXT GUY MAY HAVE
ANOTHER IDEA.

The caption changes to "Sean Conway. Former Liberal Cabinet Minister."

Sean is in his mid-forties, clean-shaven and with short straight light brown hair. He wears glasses, a blue suit, blue shirt and striped burgundy tie.

Sean says LIKE JANET, I THINK
IT IS GOOD POLICY.
WHAT THE McGUINTY GOVERNMENT
HAS DONE IS THEY MADE A
THREE-YEAR COMMITMENT EARLY
ENOUGH IN THEIR MANDATE THAT
THEY ARE GOING TO OBVIOUSLY
HAVE THE TIME AND HOPEFULLY THE
RESOURCES TO FULFILL IT.
BUT I THINK OVER THE YEARS
THAT I WAS IN THE LEGISLATURE,
THIS WAS A CONSTANT ISSUE, THAT
HOSPITALS AND THE CURRENT
ONTARIO -- THE ANNUAL TRANSFER
FROM THE ONTARIO GOVERNMENT TO
THE HOSPITAL SECTOR IS
SOMETHING LIKE 12 BILLION DOLLARS.

Steve says 12.5 BILLION DOLLARS, BUT
WHAT'S COUNTING?

Sean says WE'RE TALKING A LOT
OF MONEY.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD THING, AND
DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY DO TO
THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE
UPCOMING CABINET SHUFFLE, WE'LL
KNOW WHETHER OR NOT GEORGE
SMITHERMAN GETS TO WATCH THIS
ROLL OUT OVER THE NEXT TWO AND A
HALF TO THREE YEARS.

Steve says EVERYBODY SEEMS TO
THINK HE WILL.
YOU'RE RIGHT.
STAY TUNED.
YOU WERE IN THE MIDST OF
SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHEN YOU
WERE IN GOVERNMENT 15 YEARS AGO.
HOW LONG DID YOUR MULTIYEAR
FUNDING ATTEMPTS LAST?

The caption changes to "Dave Cooke. Former NDP Cabinet Minister."

Dave is in his early late forties, clean-shaven and with short receding brown hair. He wears a gray suit and a gray shirt.

Dave says I THINK IT LASTED
UNTIL THE SOCIAL CONTRACT CAME
IN.
BUT I MEAN, THE THREE-YEAR
FUNDING IS A GREAT IDEA, IF YOU
CAN DO IT.
THE REALITY OF IT IS THAT IF
THE ECONOMIC SITUATION CHANGES
FOR A GOVERNMENT, IF THE
REVENUES GO DOWN BECAUSE WE
WENT INTO A SLOWDOWN OR
RECESSION, THEN THAT HAS AN
IMPACT AND GOVERNMENT HAS TO
BALANCE THEIR COMMITMENTS WITH
WHAT THEIR REVENUES ARE.

Steve says SO, IT'S NOT REALLY A
COMMITMENT, IS IT?
IT'S A COMMITMENT AS LONG AS
THINGS ARE FINE.

Dave says IT'S A PROMISE TO DO
OUR BEST FOR THE NEXT...

Steve says WHAT'S WORSE?

Dave says THE OTHER THING WITH
HOSPITALS, YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT
WORK BETTER IN THE EDUCATION
SYSTEM.
THIS IS NOT GOING TO PREVENT
THE HOSPITALS FROM LINING UP
AGAIN LATE WINTER WITH THEIR
DEFICITS AND SAYING WE WANT
MORE MONEY AND NEXT YEAR SAYING
WE STILL NEED MORE MONEY.
IT'S NOT QUITE AS NEAT AND
CLEAN IN THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
AS IT COULD BE WITH OTHER
PUBLIC SERVICES.

Sean says I WANT TO COME BACK
TO YOUR POINT.
I DO THINK THAT OUR VIEWING
AUDIENCE AND THE TAX PAYING
PUBLIC OF ONTARIO, THEY'RE NOT
UNREASONABLE.
THERE MAY VERY WELL BE
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT COULD
DEVELOP IN 18 MONTHS THAT
CHANGE THE ENVIRONMENT TOTALLY.
WE MADE SOME DECISIONS IN
1988-89 THAT DIDN'T LOOK ALL
TOGETHER PRUDENT AGAINST THE
TANKING ECONOMY 18 MONTHS LATER.
I THINK ONTARIANS, AS CITIZENS
AND TAXPAYERS, YES, THEY WANT
TO SEE A HOP SECTOR WELL-FUNDED
AND I FULLY EXPECT THAT THIS
GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO WANT TO
MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE THIS
COMMITMENT REAL.
BUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE INTO
THE FUTURE.
THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS
DEVELOPED THAT ARE COMPLETELY
UNPRECEDENTED.

Janet says AND I THINK THAT'S
ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WERE
STARTING TO WORK -- AND I THINK
THE LIBERALS ARE MOVING FORWARD
WITH IT -- IS A MULTIYEAR
FUNDING FRAMEWORK SO YOU BUILD
IN THE VARIABLES SO THE
HOSPITAL KNOWS THAT THEIR
FUNDING WILL RANGE FROM, SAY,
2 PERCENT TO 3 PERCENT OR, YOU KNOW, SO AT
LEAST YOU KNOW WHAT THE FLOOR
IS.
BECAUSE THE FINANCE MINISTER
HAS TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY.
THERE IS NO QUESTION.
YEAH, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS
DRASTICALLY, YOU KNOW, TO THE
ECONOMIC PICTURE.
SO, YOU BUILD THAT IN SO THE
HOSPITALS KNOW WHAT THEIR FLUX
IS.
AND IF THEY'RE DOING THAT, THAT
IS A GOOD THING AND MINIMIZES
THE PROBLEM WE'VE BEEN TALKING
ABOUT.

Dave says POLITICALLY, IT IS
PROBABLY AN ATTEMPT AND A GOOD
ONE, THAT WE FOUND THAT
FOUR-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THE
TEACHERS AND TO TRY TO GET
SOMETHING THAT TAKES SOME OF
THE RANCOR OUT OF HEALTH CARE
AND POLITICALLY IT'S A GOOD...
GOT A PRETTY GOOD FOUNDATION AT
THIS POINT.

Janet says THEY ALSO APPROVED
FOR SOME OF THE HOSPITALS,
RIGHT?
BECAUSE THE BALANCED BUDGET
COMMITMENT OR THE RULE THAT A
HOSPITAL HAS TO BALANCE THEIR
BUDGET IS STILL THERE AND
THEY'VE JUST RECENTLY GIVEN
APPROVAL TO HOSPITALS FOR WHAT
THEY CALL STEP SIX AND STEP
SEVEN IN THEIR BALANCE BUDGET
PLANS.
WHAT THEY WERE ASKED TO DO IS
LAY OUT HOW THEY WERE TO COME
INTO BALANCE AND START WITH THE
EASY STUFF, THE CUTS TO
ADMINISTRATION, THAT SORT OF
THING AND WORK THEIR WAY UP TO
CANCELLING PROGRAMMES AND LAYING
OFF STAFF.

Steve says DO YOU KNOW WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF HOSPITALS
BALANCED THEIR BOOKS?

Janet says THIS LAST YEAR?

Steve says 58 PERCENT.
58 PERCENT.

Janet says THEY HAVE NOW
APPROVED THE FINAL STEPS AND
WHAT THOSE FINAL TWO STEPS, FOR
MANY HOSPITALS IS GOING TO
MEAN, IS PROGRAMME CLOSURES,
STAFF LAYOFF, AND SO THAT'S
GOING TO BE AT ODDS WITH THE
HOPE THEY'RE BRINGING PEACE BY
DOING A THREE-YEAR COMMITMENT.

Steve says WHEN YOU ANNOUNCE
MULTIYEAR FUNDING LIKE THIS,
DOES THAT BRING THE OTHER 42 PERCENT
OF THE HOSPITALS IN THIS
PROVINCE CLOSER TO A BALANCED
BUDGET?

Sean says ONE WOULD HOPE SO,
BUT I THINK THERE IS EXPERIENCE
TO TEMPER THE HOPE.
I THINK DAVE MADE A VERY GOOD
POINT.
AGAIN, OUR AUDIENCE WOULD
PROBABLY BE INTERESTED TO KNOW
THIS IF THEY DON'T ALREADY,
THAT THE LARGEST SINGLE PIECE
OF ANY HOSPITAL'S BUDGET IS ITS
PAYROLL.
IT IS A HUMAN RESOURCE STAFF
ISSUE.
AND A MULTIYEAR COMMITMENT, AT
LEAST IF YOU ARE IN HOSPITAL
PLAN, IT GIVES YOU SOME BETTER
COMFORT TO DEAL WITH...

Janet says YOU KNOW WHAT IT
DOES, THOUGH?
THE UNIONS COME TO THE
BARGAINING TABLE AND SAYS OK,
YOU HAVE TWO, TWO, AND TWO AND
WE WANT TWO, TWO, AND TWO AND
TAKES AWAY THEIR ABLE TO
BARGAIN BETTER.

Steve says UNDERSTOOD.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT
YOU, AS FORMER POLITICIAN, WILL
LOVE TO TALK ABOUT, I'M SURE.
ANOTHER IMPORTANT STORY AND ONE
THAT GOT LOST IN THE SHUFFLE OF
LAST-MINUTE BILLS PASSED WHEN
THE LEGISLATURE ROSE.
THE LIBERALS ANNOUNCED THEY
WILL SET UP CITIZEN ASSEMBLIES,
ORDINARY VOTERS LOOKING AT WAYS
TO MAKE OUR SYSTEM MORE
DEMOCRATIC AND GIVE US ALL MORE
OF A SAY IN WHO GETS ELECTED
AND HOW.
AT A TIME WHEN FEWER AND FEWER
PEOPLE ARE VOTING, THE
GOVERNMENT WANTS TO FIND WAYS
TO ENGAGE MORE OF US.

A clip from the legislature rolls with the caption "Honourable Michael Bryant. Attorney General."

Michael is in his early fifties, clean-shaven and with short straight light brown hair. He wears a blue suit, white shirt and blue tie.

He says THIS WILL BE A VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT STEP IN THE DIRECTION
OF ELECTION REFORM.

Steve says THE LIBERALS SAY THE
LEGISLATION WILL BEGIN TO FIX
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CALLS
ONTARIO'S DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT.
THE BILL CALLS FOR A CITIZENS'
ASSEMBLY TO REVIEW THE
PROVINCE'S ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND
RECOMMEND POSSIBLE CHANGES.
IF THE ASSEMBLY DECIDES THAT
CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE TO THE
WAY WE ELECT OUR M.P.P.'S, THEIR
RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE PUT TO
A REFERENDUM.
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS WOULD BE
CHOSEN AT RANDOM FROM EXISTING
VOTER LISTS AND PARTICIPATION
WOULD BE VOLUNTARY.

The caption changes to "Michael Bryant. Minister for Democratic Renewal."

He says THE TREND IS DECLINING VOTER
TURN OUT.
IT CONTINUES TO DECLINE AND HAS
DECLINED IN EVERY PROVINCIAL
ELECTION OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.
AND IT ALSO GETS WORSE AND
WORSE FOR THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE
AND IN MANY CASES NEW CANADIANS
WHO ARE NOT TURNING OUT THE
VOTE.

Steve says CURRENTLY, ONTARIO
USES THE SO-CALLED FIRST PAST
THE POST SYSTEM.
THE PARTY THAT WINS THE MOST
VOTES IN A RIDING WINS THE
SEAT, EVEN IF THE WINNER GETS
FEWER THAN HALF THE VOTES.
SOME SAY THIS MEANS UNLESS YOU
BACK THE WINNER, YOUR VOTE
DOESN'T COUNT.

A clip shows images of an election day.

A woman at a voting table says YOU MAY PUT IT IN.

The caption changes to "Howard Hampton. Ontario NDP Leader."
Howard is in his early fifties, clean-shaven and with short straight graying hair. He wears a blue suit, blue shirt and striped blue tie.

He says THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS WITH
THE FIRST PAST THE POST SYSTEM,
WHICH WE HAVE NOW BECAUSE YOU
COULD HAVE A GOVERNMENT THAT
RECEIVES ONLY 40 PERCENT OF THE VOTE
OR A PARTY RECEIVES ONLY 40 PERCENT OF
THE VOTE, BUT ENDS UP WITH 75 PERCENT
OF THE SEATS AND CLEARLY THAT
DOESN'T REFLECT THE WILL OF THE
PEOPLE OR THE WILL OF THE
ELECTORATE.

Steve says SO FAR, THE MOST
DISCUSSED ALTERNATIVE IS
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
WHERE A PARTY WINS SEATS BASED
ON THEIR SHARE OF THE TOTAL
VOTE.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF A PARTY WINS
60 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL VOTES CAST, IT
WOULD RECEIVE 60 PERCENT OF THE SEATS
IN THE LEGISLATURE.
BUT OTHERS SAY SIMPLY CHANGING
OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM ISN'T
ENOUGH TO DRAW VOTERS BACK TO
THE POLLS.

The caption changes to "John Tory. Ontario PC Leader."

John Tory is in his early late forties, clean-shaven and with short wavy light brown hair. He wears a blue suit, blue shirt and gold yellow tie.

He says IS THE REASON PARTICIPATION
IS GOING DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE
THINK THE WAY WE CHOOSE OUR
POLITICIANS IS WRONG?
OR IS IT BECAUSE THEY THINK
THE WAY THE POLITICIANS ACT IS
WRONG AND THE WAY THEY DO
THINGS IS WRONG?
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY IT IS
VALUABLE TO GET THAT CITIZEN
INPUT SO THEY CAN BE ASKED THE
QUESTION, DO WE NEED TO FIX THE
SYSTEM, DO WE NEED TO FIX THE
WAY POLITICIANS BEHAVE OR DO A
BIT OF BOTH?

Steve says RECENTLY, B.C. PUT
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY A
CITIZENS' ASSEMBLY TO A
REFERENDUM.
ALTHOUGH 57 PERCENT VOTED IN FAVOUR OF
ELECTORAL REFORM, A 60 PERCENT YES
VOTE WAS NEEDED TO CHANGE THE
SYSTEM AND SO THE PROPOSAL WAS
DEFEATED.
NEVERTHELESS, ONTARIO'S
MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR
DOMESTIC RENEWAL SAYS THERE IS
MUCH ONTARIO CAN TAKE FROM
B.C.'S EXPERIENCE.

Michael Bryant says WHEN I WAS THERE LAST WEEK,
WHAT I WAS HEARING FROM PEOPLE
IS THAT THE ASSEMBLY PROCESS,
IN AND OF ITSELF, INVIGORATED
THE ELECTORATE, INVOLVED THE
ELECTORATE IN A WAY THEY'VE
NEVER BEEN INVOLVED.
WE ALL INHERITED OUR ELECTORAL
SYSTEM.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
CITIZENS TO HAVE A SAY IN IT.

Steve says MEANT IT, END IT,
WHAT SHALL WE DO ABOUT THE WAY
WE ELECT OUR POLITICIANS?
HERE TO SHARE HIS EYES, LARRY
GORDON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
FAIR VOTE ONTARIO.
WELCOME.

Larry Gordon is in his late fifties, clean-shaven and balding. HE wears glasses, a blue suit, blue shirt and patterned tie.

He says THANK YOU.

Steve says LET'S GO THROUGH THE
NUMBERS IN THE LAST PROVINCIAL
ELECTION.
THE LIBERALS WON 46 PERCENT OF THE
TOTAL VOTES, THEY GOT 70 PERCENT OF
THE SEATS.
CONSERVATIVES GOT 35 PERCENT OF THE
VOTE, 24 SEATS.
NEW DEMOCRATS, 14.7 PERCENT, SEVEN
SEATS.
GIVEN THESE NUMBERS, HOW
REPRESENTATIVE DO YOU THINK OUR
GOVERNMENTS ARE?

The caption changes to ""Larry Gordon. Fair Vote Ontario."

Larry says THAT'S BUSINESS AS
USUAL WITH FIRST PAST THE POST
VOTING.
A LOT OF ONTARIANS MIGHT BE
SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT THE LAST
TIME WE HAD A LEGITIMATE
MAJORITY GOVERNMENT IN THIS
PROVINCE WAS IN THE EARLY
1930'S.
EVERY OTHER MAJORITY GOVERNMENT
ELECTED SINCE THEN IS
ARTIFICIALLY CREATED BY THE
VOTING SYSTEM WHERE, YOU KNOW,
MAYBE 40 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE VOTED
FOR A PARTY AND ENDED UP WITH
60 PERCENT OF THE SEATS.
THAT IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE
WAY OUR VOTING SYSTEM OPERATES
ON A ROUTINE BASIS.
IT'S NOT AN ABERRATION, IT'S
NOT UNUSUAL, IT'S THE WAY THE
WORLD'S CRUDEST, MOST
ANTIQUATED VOTING SYSTEM DEALS
WITH OUR VOTES.

Steve says IS IT NECESSARILY
UNREPRESENTATIVE, THOUGH?

Larry says OH, VERY
UNREPRESENTATIVE.
IF YOU HAVE A PARTY GETTING FAR
MORE SEATS THAN A PORTION OF
THE VOTE THAT THEY ACTUALLY
ATTRACT, THAT IS NOT FAIR
OUTCOME.
THAT IS NOT ALLOWING
EVERYBODY'S VOTE TO ACTUALLY
COUNT.
IT PRODUCES REPRESENTATION FOR
THEM IN A WAY THAT THEY WANT IT.
AND THERE ARE CERTAIN
VIEWPOINTS THAT ARE ACTUALLY
NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO GET INTO
THE DOORS OF QUEENS PARK RIGHT
NOW, THE GREEN PARTY BEING A
CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF THAT.
SO, NOT ONLY DOES IT DISTORT
WHAT MANY VOTERS ARE SAY, NOT
ONLY DOES IT PRECLUDES SOME
PEOPLE FROM GETTING FAIRLY
REPRESENTED, IT ELIMINATES
SOME POLITICAL
VIEWPOINTS FROM GETTING ANYBODY
ON...

Steve says HAVING SAID, THAT
CHANGING THE WAY WE PICKED OUR
POLITICIANS FOR MORE THAN 100
YEARS IS A DIFFICULT
PROPOSITION AND COMPLICATED ONE
AS WELL.
DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNMENT IS
MAKING THE RIGHT APPROACH BY
MAKING THESE CITIZENS
ASSEMBLIES WHERE ORDINARY
PEOPLE CAN BE ASKED TO COME UP
WITH A SOLUTION?

Larry says ABSOLUTELY.
AND I THINK PREMIER GORDON IN
BRITISH COLUMBIA WAS THE FIRST
POLITICAL LEADER, NOT ONLY IN
CANADA, BUT ANYWHERE IN THE
WORLD, TO AUTHORIZE A
INDEPENDENT CITIZEN-DRIVEN
REFORM PROCESS, HAS SET THE
TONE.
HE'S RAISED THE BAR ON THE WAY
WE'LL DO DEMOCRATIC REFORM IN
THE 21ST CENTURY.
ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT'S
IMPEDED DEMOCRATIC REFORM IN
GENERAL AND SPECIFICALLY
ELECTORAL REFORM, IS THAT
GOVERNMENTS OF ANY STRIPE, WHEN
THEY'RE PUT IN POWER BY A
VOTING SYSTEM, TEND TO BE QUITE
ENAMOURED OF THE SYSTEM THAT PUT
THEM IN POWER AND THEY ARE
AMONG THE LAST THAT WANT TO
COME AND CHANGE THE RULES OF
THE GAME.
FROM A VOTERS' PERSPECTIVE,
WHEN WE'RE OUT THERE CASTING
WASTED VOTES OR TRYING TO
SUPPORT A PARTY THAT CAN'T
EVEN GET INTO THE GAME RIGHT
NOW, WE SEE IT A DIFFERENT WAY.
THE VOTING SYSTEM IS AN
INSTRUMENT THAT WE CITIZENS USE
TO CREATE A PARLIAMENT IN OUR
OWN IMAGE.
WHEN WE SEE THAT IT IS NOT
WORKING AND BADLY
MALFUNCTIONING, I THINK THE
CITIZEN-DRIVEN PROCESS MAKES
CHANGE HAPPEN AND WE'RE SEEING
THAT IN B.C.

Steve says I WANT TO PICK UP ON
AN EXPRESSION THAT YOU JUST
USED "WASTED VOTES."
DAVE COOKE, WHEN YOU WERE A
FOLLOW -- POLITICIAN, WHAT WAS
THE LOWEST PERCENTAGE OF VOTES
YOU GOT IN AN ELECTION AND
STILL WON?

Dave says I THINK AROUND 45 PERCENT.

Steve says A PRETTY GOOD NUMBER
BY TODAY'S STANDARDS.
IN OTHER WORDS, IN THAT
ELECTION, MORE PEOPLE VOTED
GWEN YOU THAN FOR YOU?

Dave says I WOULDN'T SAY THEY
VOTED AGAINST ME, THEY VOTED
FOR SOMEONE ELSE.

Steve says A NICE WAY TO PUT IT.
MY QUESTION, THOUGH, THE DAY
AFTER THE ELECTION, DID YOU
CONSIDER THE 55 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE
WHO DIDN'T VOTE FOR YOU WASTED
VOTERS?

Dave says NO.
AND I REALLY DISAGREE WITH THE
DEFINITION OF THAT.
I THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A
LOOK AT WHAT THE PARTIES...
DIFFERENT PARTIES GET IN TERMS
OF THEIR SUPPORT OVERALL, HOW
MANY SEATS THEY GET, BUT THE
MESSAGES SENT BY VOTERS WHEN
THEY GO TO THE POLLS.
TO SAY THAT THE PEOPLE THAT
DIDN'T GET THEIR CANDIDATE
ELECTED, THIS THEIR VOTES HAVE
BEEN WASTED WOULD BE TO SAY
THAT, SAY IN THE AMERICAN
SYSTEM WHERE YOU HAVE DIRECT
ELECTIONS FOR THE PRESIDENT,
THAT EVERYBODY THAT DIDN'T VOTE
FOR THE WINNER, THEY WASTED
THEIR TIME BY GOING TO THE
POLLS.
THAT IS NOT TRUE.
THEY SEND A MESSAGE, THEY
PARTICIPATE, AND I THINK THAT
POLITICIANS ELECTED NEED LISTEN
TO THOSE MESSAGES AND LOOK AT
THE PERCENTAGE OF SUPPORT AND
HOW BROAD THE SUPPORT IS.
NOW THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT OUR
SYSTEM IS PERFECT.
BUT I ALSO THINK THAT PART OF
THE PROCESS -- PART OF THE
PROBLEM THAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT
NOW IS THAT PEOPLE, AGAIN, ARE
TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS OF
ELECTING.
I STILL HAVEN'T HEARD A LOT OF
POLITICIANS OR OTHERS SAY, NOW
WHAT WILL THIS MEAN IN CHANGES
OF GOVERNING?
HOW WILL...

Steve says YEAH.
LET'S HOLD OFF ON THAT BECAUSE
WE WANT TO GET TO THE FIRST
PART FIRST.
SAME QUESTION TO YOU.
WHAT IS THE LOWEST PERCENTAGE
OF TOTAL VOTE YOU GOT AND STILL
WON.

Sean says DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER
QUESTION?

Steve says IS IT THAT BAD?

Sean says YES.
I'M THE CLASSIC ACCIDENTAL
RESULT OF THE SYSTEM THAT LARRY
IS COMPLAINING ABOUT.
MY FIRST ELECTION IN 1975, I
ACTUALLY WON A SEAT IN THE
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
WITH SOMETHING LIKE 35.7 PERCENT OF
VOTE.
IT WAS A VERY CLOSE THREE-WAY
RACE WHERE THE WINNER GOT 35.5 PERCENT
OR 36 PERCENT AND THE PERSON WHO CAME
THIRD GOT 30 PERCENT.

Steve says DID YOU CONSIDER THE
DAY AFTER THE ELECTION THAT YOU
WERE ONLY REPRESENTING THE
35.7 PERCENT THAT VOTED FOR YOU?

Sean says THE DAY AFTER THE
ELECTION?
I GUESS I KNEW THAT THE NEXT
ELECTION WASN'T TOO FAR AWAY
AND MY TWO COMPETITORS WERE
GOING TO STAY IN THE FIELDS
WITH ME.
I FELT THAT IT WAS A CLEAR
SIGNAL THAT I HAD WORK TO DO.
IN FACT, I WAS A KIND OF
ACCIDENTAL RESULT, MORE EASILY
SAID NOW THAN IT WAS 30 YEARS
AGO THIS SUMMER.
BUT I ESSENTIALLY AGREE WITH
DAVE COOKE.
IF YOU ARE IN THAT SITUATION,
YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS A
SUBSTANTIAL GROUP OUT THERE
THAT DID NOT SUPPORT YOU.
IN SOME CASES, IT IS NOT SO
MUCH A VOTE AGAINST YOU AS
OTHER FACTORS.
I MAY BE, IN MY YEARS, A BIG
RURAL CONSTITUENCY AND I WAS
RUNNING AGAINST TWO ENORMOUSLY
POPULAR FOLKS...

Steve says I WANT THIS NOTION,
AGAIN, JANET, WHERE THE
SUGGESTION IS IF YOU DIDN'T
VOTE FOR THE WINNER, YOUR VOTE
DIDN'T COUNT.
DAY AFTER THE ELECTION DAY, AND
YOU CAN TELL ME YOUR NUMBER,
TOO F YOU WANT, DID YOU
CONSIDER YOURSELF TO BE THE
REPRESENTATIVE OF ONLY THOSE
PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU OR
EVERYBODY?

Janet says WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I
GOT OVER 50 PERCENT, BOTH TIMES IN MY
RIDING.

Steve says HEAR, HEAR.
AND THE THIRD TIME?

Janet says THE THIRD TIME, MANY
PEOPLE TOLD ME TO CHANGE
CAREERS IN THIS COUNTY.
NO, I FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT
I WAS ELECTED TO BE THE M.P.P.
FOR THAT RIDING.

Steve says FOR EVERYBODY?
NOT JUST FOR THE PEOPLE THAT
ELECTED YOU?

Janet says NO.
NO.
THAT'S YOUR JOB.
MOST GOVERNMENTS, WHATEVER
POLITICAL STRIPE, GO IN
BELIEVING THAT, YOU KNOW,
THEY'VE MADE COMMITMENTS, BUT
THEY ARE GOVERNING FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE PROVINCE.
AND THEY SHOULDN'T AND MOST
DON'T SORT OF DIVIDE IT UP.
I THINK ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL
ISSUES HERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW,
EXAMINING HOW WE CHOOSE, THAT
IS A GOOD PROCESS TO GO THROUGH.
IT IS NOT THE BE ALL AND END
ALL.
IT IS NOT THE MAGIC BULLET.
IT IS NOT, I BELIEVE, THE ROOT
OF THE PROBLEM AND SO LET'S NOT
SAY THAT IF WE CHANGE IT TO
P.R. SYSTEM OR WHATEVER THAT
SOMEHOW, RATHER, THAT ALL OF
THIS PARTICIPATION ISSUE IS
GOING TO GO AWAY BECAUSE IT
WON'T.

Steve says CAN I...

Sean says JUST UPON YOUR
QUESTION.
I WASN'T CLEAR.
BUT I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT ONCE
YOU'RE ELECTED, REGARDLESS OF
THE SIZE OF YOUR PERSONAL
MANDATE, IT WAS CERTAINLY MY
VIEW AND THE VIEW OF JUST ABOUT
EVERY PARLIAMENTARIAN THAT I
EVER KNEW THAT YOU VERY MUCH
FELT THAT YOU REPRESENTED
EVERYONE AND SHAMELESSLY
SOMETIMES YOU WERE DETERMINED
TO SEE IF YOU COULDN'T GET
EVERY VOTE IN THE NEXT ELECTION.

Steve says LARRY, WHEN YOU HEAR
THIS, DOES IT MAKE YOU CHANGE
YOUR MIND ABOUT IF YOU DIDN'T
VOTE FOR THE WINNER, YOU WASTED
YOUR VOTE?

Larry says ODDLY ENOUGH IT
DOESN'T AND I RESPECT YOUR
FEELINGS.
BUT IN ALL FAIRNESS, LOOKING AT
FROM THE VOTERS' PERSPECTIVE,
I'VE NEVER RUN FOR OFFICE AND
HAVEN'T SERVED IN OFFICE, BUT
YOU COULD NOT REPRESENT
CONSTITUENTS IN YOUR RIDING
THAT HAD OPPOSING POLITICAL
POINTS OF VIEW.

Steve says WHY NOT?

Larry says BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING
TO HAVE TO VOTE AT SOME POINT
ON A PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND
IF THERE ARE PEOPLE IN YOUR
RIDING THAT WANT THE OPPOSITE
AND OTHERS WANT IT PASSED, YOU
HAVE ONE VOTE.

Steve says AT THE END OF THE
DAY, YOU HAVE TO DECIDE.
YOU CAN'T SUPPORT EVERYBODY.

Larry says EXACTLY.
EXACTLY.
THAT IS THE POINT AT -- NO.
IF YOU -- IF YOU HAVE A
PROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION
VOTING SYSTEM, EVERY VOTER WILL
CAST A VOTE TO HELP ELECT
SOMEBODY TO REPRESENT...

Janet says THAT IS THE ISSUE
TODAY, BUT SIX MONTHS FROM NOW,
YOU MAY HAVE AN ISSUE THAT MAY
NEVER HAVE BEEN A DISCUSSION
BECAUSE THE VOTE DIDN'T OCCUR.

Dave says SURE, THERE'S GOING
TO BE DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW
IN EACH RIDING, BUT THE ISSUE
THAT VOTERS LOOK AT, EVERY FOUR
YEARS, IS THE OVERALL
PERFORMANCE OF BOTH THE
GOVERNMENT AND THE M.P.P.
I MAY DISAGREE WITH YOU ON
THAT, BUT I MAY AGREE WITH YOU
ON.
IT WENT FROM 42 PERCENT OF THE VOTE
AND GOT 72 PERCENT OF THE VOTE.
DOES THAT MEAN I'LL ONLY
REPRESENTATIVES 72 PERCENT?

Larry says IN GENERAL, YES, YOU
WILL BE CASTING VOTES THAT WILL
MAKE 72 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE...

Dave says A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE
DIDN'T AGREE WITH EVERY ONE OF
MY VOTE EITHER.

Larry says THIS IS THE CLASSIC
ILLUSTRATION OF THE WAY THAT
LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM THE SIDE
OF THE PEOPLE WHO GET SENT TO
PARLIAMENT UNDER THE CURRENT
SYSTEM AND THE VOTERS WHO ARE
OUT THERE CASTING VOTES,
SOMETIMES THE MAJORITY OF US
CASTING VOTES AND NOT BEING
ABLE TO ELECT EVERYBODY.
SOME PEOPLE WANTING TO SUPPORT
NEW POLITICAL PARTIES THAT CAN'T
GET IN THE DOOR.
AND THAT'S WHY THE GREAT
MAJORITY OF INDUSTRIAL...
WESTERN INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACIES
MOVE TO FAIR VOTING SYSTEMS
OVER THE LAST 50 TO 100 YEARS
TO EMPOWER VOTERS.

Janet says JUST A SECOND.
JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS
ELECTED -- I WON AND I LOST.
SO, THEREFORE, I SHOULD BE
NEUTRAL IN THIS ISSUE.
[LAUGHTER]
BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK,
THOUGH, TOO, THERE IS ANOTHER
ISSUE ABOUT P.R.
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT
PART P.R. SYSTEM, I THINK IS
SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD LOOK
AT FOR A LOT OF REASONS.

Steve says WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Janet says SOME OF YOUR SEATS
WOULD BE ELECTED ON THE
CONSTITUENCY, FIRST PAST THE
POST, BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A
PORTION OF YOUR SEATS BASED ON
A PEER'S REPRESENTATION
THAT IT WOULD COME FROM A LIST
OF PEOPLE APPOINTED BY THE
PARTIES.
THE REASON WHY I THINK THAT,
AND I SHOULD SAY HERE, TOO, AN
ORGANIZATION CALLED EQUAL
VOICE, WHICH IS TRYING TO GUESS
MORE WOMEN TO GET ELECTED IN
THE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE IT IS
WOEFULLY UNDERREPRESENTED IN
TERMS OF WOMEN, WE THINK THAT
MIGHT HELP.
I'M A MEMBER OF THAT GROUP.
IT MIGHT HELP BECAUSE IT WILL
GIVE THE PARTIES AN OPPORTUNITY
TO APPOINT PEOPLE TO ROUND OUT
THEIR SLATES AS IT WERE.
SO, THAT MIGHT BE -- MAYBE A
PARTY GETS MORE SEATS IN AN
URBAN AS OPPOSED TO RURAL OR
MEN OR WOMEN SO YOU CAN ROUND
THAT OUT.
I THINK PART P.R. SYSTEM IS A
GOOD THING TO LOOK AT.
BUT SECONDLY, ONE OF THE ISSUES
WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL
ABOUT IS ACCOUNTABILITY AND
THAT IS A BIG THING IN
GOVERNMENT THESE DAYS.
IF YOU ELECT SOMEONE TO
IMPLEMENT A PROGRAMME AND THEY
DON'T HAVE A MAJORITY
GOVERNMENT, WHO'S ACCOUNTABLE
FOR THAT PROGRAMME NOT GETTING
IMPLEMENTED AT THE END OF THE
DAY?
WITH THE SYSTEM WE HAVE NOW,
YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A
MAJORITY GOVERNMENT THAT CAN BE
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR WHETHER OR
NOT THEY DID WHAT THEY SAID
THEY WOULD DO AND THE VOTERS
GET A CHANCE TO CHOOSE.

Steve says DO YOU THINK THAT...
IS THAT A STRENGTH OF THE
CURRENT SYSTEM THAT AT LEAST IT
DOES -- IT DOES ENCOURAGE THE
ELECTION OF MAJORITY
GOVERNMENTS, EVEN WITH LESS
THAN HALF THE VOTE?

Larry says THEY ARE NOT MAJORITY
GOVERNMENTS.
THEY ARE NOT GOVERNMENTS PUT IN
POWER BY THE MAJORITY.
OUR SYSTEM RIGHT NOW ALLOWS A
MAJORITY -- MINORITY OF VOTERS
TO ELECT A GOVERNMENT THAT ACTS
AS THOUGH IT IS A MAJORITY
BECAUSE IT WINS A MAJORITY SEAT
AND EXERCISES 100 PERCENT CONTROL OF
THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
WE DO NOT HAVE LEGITIMATE
DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY RULE.

Sean says FOR HIM AND HIS
GROUP, I AGREE, I THINK THERE
ARE REAL PROBLEMS WITH THE
CURRENT SYSTEM.
IT'S TIMELY AND I'M GLAD THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE
GOVERNMENT ARE GOING TO TAKE A
LOOK AT THIS AND INVOLVE
CITIZENS.
I THINK THAT IS ALL FOR THE
GOOD.
LARRY'S POINT TURNS ON THE
NOTION I THINK THAT AN ABSOLUTE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE HERE IS THE
REPRESENTATIVENESS OF AN
ASSEMBLY IN A GOVERNMENT AND I
THINK THAT IS A FAIR POINT.
IS THAT THE ONLY ISSUE?
JANET'S POINT IS A GOOD ONE AS
WELL.
ONE OF THINGS ABOUT THE
CANADIAN SYSTEM, THE ONTARIO
VERSION OF THE CANADIAN SYSTEM,
IMPERFECT AS IT IS, ONE OF
THINGS IT GIVES YOU IS
EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT.
BUT ANOTHER ISSUE ARISES IN
THIS, IT SEEMS TO ME, AND THAT
IS IF YOU LOOK, FOR EXAMPLE, AT
NEW ZEALAND, WHICH IS ANOTHER
ONE OF THE COMMONWEALTH
MEMBERS, WE SHARE MUCH OF THE
SAME POLITICAL HERITAGE.
I KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT SINCE
NEW ZEALAND EMBRACED A VERSION,
A SORT OF GERMAN-STYLE
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
SOME YEARS AGO, THAT, IN FACT,
VOTER PARTICIPATION IS
DECLINING.
SO, ONE OF THE QUESTION THAT'S
OFTEN PUT IS YOU HAVE TO CHANGE
THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM IF YOU
WANT TO MAINTAIN VOTER
PARTICIPATION AT A GOOD OR
HIGHER LEVEL WHEN, IN FACT, THE
NEW ZEALAND EXPERIENCE
INDICATES THAT YOU CAN GO TO
SOMETHING LIKE PO PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION AND
NOT ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM.

Steve says SIT YOUR CONCERN THAT,
IF HE IS RIGHT AND IT IS NOT
THE WAY WE ELECT THEM, BUT WHO
WE ELECT AND HOW THEY'RE DOING
THEIR JOBS, ARE YOU WORRIED
YOU'RE SPINNING YOUR WHEELS?

Larry says WE'RE NOT SPINNING
OUR WHEELS.
I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT
BRINGING IN A FAIR VOTING
SYSTEM AND HAVING FAIR ELECTION
OUTCOMES WILL SOLVE EVERY
POLITICAL PROBLEM AND
FRUSTRATION WE HAVE.
WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT
REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY IS
BUILT ON A FOUNDATION SET BY
THE VOTING SYSTEM AND WHAT
WE'RE SAYING, YET THE CLOSER WE
GET TO A SYSTEM, WHERE EVERY
VOTER'S VOTE COUNTS AND WHERE
ELECTION OUTCOMES ACTUALLY
REFLECT AT WHAT WE SAY AT THE
BALLOT BOX ELECTION NIGHT THAT
WE LAY A STRONGER FOUNDATION
FOR DEMOCRACY -- IF I COULD
JUST SAY, TOO, BECAUSE THERE'S
SOME MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT
THIS, THERE'S BEEN STUDIES ON
PROPORTIONAL GOVERNMENTS AND
THERE'S A MYTH THAT IT BRINGS
ABOUT INEFFICIENCY OR
INEFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT.
THAT MYTH IS NOT BACKED BY THE
RESEARCH AND EXTENSIVE
EXPERIENCE IN EUROPEAN
DEMOCRACIES.
GOOD DEMOCRACY PRESENTS GOOD
GOVERNMENTS AND THE RESEARCH
BACKS THAT UP.

Dave says ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE NEED TO GET IN THE MIX
OF THIS WHEN THE CITIZEN
ASSEMBLIES ARE -- IS WHAT
GOVERNMENT WILL LOOK LIKE IF WE
CHANGE.
AND I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC HAS
A RIGHT NOT JUST TO KNOW WHAT
YOU'RE ADVOCATING IN TERMS OF
HOW PEOPLE ARE ELECTED, BUT WE
WILL HAVE COALITIONS.
I NEVER HEAR THE THREE
POLITICAL PARTIES, AND EVEN MY
OWN POLITICAL PARTY, WHICH
ADVOCATES PROPORTIONAL
REPRESENTATION, I DON'T HEAR
THEM JUMPING OUT THERE AND
SAYING, YES, WE WILL BE PART OF
COALITIONS.
WE WILL HAVE STABLE
GOVERNMENTS, BECAUSE WE WILL
JUMP IN WITH ANOTHER POLITICAL
PARTY AND HAVE COALITION
GOVERNMENTS.
I DON'T HEAR ANYBODY TALKING
ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE GREEN
PARTY OR SOME OTHER VERY SMALL
PARTY WOULD HAVE IN TERMS OF
SETTING...

Steve says DO YOU...

Dave says WHEN YOU ARE TALK
ABOUT GOVERNMENTS BEING
EFFECTIVE AND TALKING ABOUT
WASTED VOTES, I WOULD FEEL MY
VOTE IS WASTED THAT IF A PARTY
GETS 5 PERCENT OF THE VOTE GETS TO SET
A MAJOR PART OF THE GOVERNMENT
AGENDA WHEN THEY HAVE A SMALL
PART OF PUBLIC SUPPORT.

Janet says LOOK AT WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN OTTAWA RIGHT NOW.
TO ME, THIS IS THE DOWNSIDE OF
WHAT A TOTAL P.R. SYSTEM CAN DO
IS THAT YOU GET A PARLIAMENT
THAT IS INCAPABLE OF DOING
SOMETHING AND WE'VE SEEN -- IT
IS A DISASTER UP THERE IN
OTTAWA.
AND THAT IS NOT WHAT VOTERS
WANT, EITHER.
THEY WANT A SYSTEM THAT WO,.
I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY
MAGIC SOLUTION HERE.
I THINK JOHN TORY IS QUITE
RIGHT.
IT IS NOT THE WAY WE CHOOSE, IT
IS THE WAY THAT POLITICIANS ARE
CONDUCTING THEMSELVES AND THE
VOTERS -- THERE IS A WHOLE
RANGE OF PROBLEMS.
LET'S LOOK AT IT.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD THING, BUT
IT IS NOT THE MAGIC BULLET.

Steve says FORGIVE ME.
WE'RE DOWN TO A MINUTE AND A
HALF.
IF YOU HAD YOUR DRUTHERS, WHAT
SYSTEM WOULD YOU REPLACE OUR
SYSTEM, FIRST PAST THE POST
WITH?

Larry says A SYSTEM BASED ON
PROPORTIONALITY AND GETTING AS
CLOSE AS WE CAN TO MAKING EVERY
VOTER'S VOTE COUNT EQUALLY,
REGARDLESS OF WHAT VIEW THEY
HAVE AND WHERE THEY LIVE AND
THAT'S THE WAY MOST WESTERN
DEMOCRACIES HAVE BEEN OPERATING.

Steve says PURE PROPORTIONAL
REPRESENTATION?

Larry says A BLENDED SYSTEM.
YOU CAN BRING IN THE BENEFITS
OF PROPORTIONALITY AND BUILD
THAT ON THE POLITICAL SYSTEM
WE'RE USED TO HERE.
BUT THE IMPORTANCE IS FIND A
WAY TO EMPOWER VOTERS.
WE SHOULD NOT FEAR -- I DON'T
THINK VOTERS DO FEAR THE IDEA
OF HAVING ALL OF US HAVING
EQUAL AND EFFECTIVE VOTES.

Sean says ON THIS KIND OF
DEBATE AND I THINK IT IS TIMELY
TO LOOK AT THE SYSTEM.
BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE MAIN
PROBLEMS THAT YOU WANT TO
ADDRESS?
ONE OF THE THINGS, QUITE
FRANKLY, THAT I THINK VOTERS IN
THIS COUNTRY ARE PRETTY TICKED
OFF ABOUT IS THEY THINK THERE
IS TOO MUCH POWER EXERCISE AT
THE CENTRE, BY PARTY LEADERS,
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
THEY DON'T LIKE DEAL MAKING
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU.
ANY VERSION OF P.R. ENHANCES
THE POWER OF PARTY LEADER, IS
GOING TO PRODUCE UNBELIEVABLE
DEAL MAKING AFTER ELECTIONS
BEHIND CLOSED DOOR, SOMETHING
THAT ONTARIANS AND CANADIAN,
UNLIKE ITALIANS AND GERMANS,
ARE NOT ACCUSTOMED TO.
SO, WHAT I FAVOUR A GOOD DEBATE
ABOUT CHANGE, BE CLEAR THAT YOU
ARE GOING TO FIX THE PROBLEMS
THAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS, AND WE
ARE CANADIANS, WE'RE NOT
ITALIANS, WE'RE NOT ISRAELIS,
WE HAVE OUR VOTING SYSTEM GROWS
OUT OF OUR HISTORY AND OUR
CULTURE.
MAKE SURE THAT YOUR REFORM
FIXES SOME OF THE PROBLEM AND
DOESN'T AGGRAVATE THE PROBLEM
YOU'VE ALREADY GOT.

Steve says THAT HAS TO BE
THE LAST WORD, DESPITE THE FACT
IT CAME FROM A MAN WITH A VERY
SORE THROAT.
GET WELL, OK, SEAN CONWAY?

Janet says THANK YOU TO LARRY
FOR BEING INVOLVED IN THE
SYSTEM AS A CITIZEN.

Larry says THANK YOU. THIS DISCUSSION IS GOING IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.

Steve says KEEP IT GOING, LARRY,
AS THE CITIZENS ASSEMBLIES GO
FORWARD.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
AND THAT'S "FOURTH READING" FOR
THIS WEEK.
I'M STEVE PAIKIN.
UNTIL NEXT SUNDAY, THANK YOU.

Music plays and the end credits roll, as Steve and the rest continue the conversation.

Queen's Park Bureau Chief, Susanna Kelley.

Producer, Erica Balch.

Editor, Rein Suurallik.

Director, Michael Smith.

A production of TVOntario. Copyright 2005, The Ontario Educational.

Watch: Hospitals and Electricity