Limiting knowledge

There's been some comment already on Ian Urquhart's column about Ontario's MMP referendum. But while it's for the best that some prominent Libs are willing to back MMP and Urquhart himself seems to see the referendum succeeding, it's worth noting yet another obstacle that the governing Libs may have put in the way of a strong campaign on the issue:

Given the widespread public ignorance of the electoral reform issue – a recent Environics poll showed 70 per cent of Ontarians are not familiar with it – how, then, will voters learn about the pros and cons of MMP?

The government plans a major public education campaign, run by Elections Ontario, which is a reliably neutral body.

Unfortunately, however, neutrality imposes severe limits on messaging. John Hollins, head of Elections Ontario, last week told a meeting of representatives of the political parties that, because of the requirement that he not take sides, the public education campaign will dwell on the "mechanics" of the proposed new electoral system rather than the "consequences."

Of course, the devil is in the consequences.

Hollins also told the meeting that the referendum regulations could be interpreted as meaning the parties must stay out of the electoral reform campaign. That would put a crimp in NDP plans to make support for MMP a part of their platform.

Taking into account all of the above, it is quite possible Ontarians will be making their choice on the referendum question with minimal knowledge of what is at stake.

Referendum experts say that in such circumstances the voters usually opt for the status quo over the unknown.

Hopefully there'll be some clarification from Elections Ontario as to who may and may not be involved in the referendum - and that clarification will make sure that political parties aren't prevented from expressing a position on a vote which may have far more long-range consequences for Ontario than the election itself. But if Hollins' current interpretation is correct, then it looks far too likely that electoral reform will get lost in the shuffle of this fall's election.

As it was, Ontario's party machines figured to have far more experience in securing media attention than the limited-resource, ad hoc coalitions being set up for the referendum. And the referendum already figured to face the problem of not fitting neatly into the talk about personality politics that tends to dominate election coverage.

But the likely gap in coverage will only become far worse if the parties are prohibited from even discussing the issue. Parties with a strong view on the issue be prevented from simply stating one of their uniting principles - and volunteers and organizers would presumably face far more of a burden in having to divide their activities between party support and issue advocacy. Which would figure to offer a boost to the Libs, Cons and electoral status quo, while hurting the chances of the NDP, the Greens and the MMP side of the referendum.

Hopefully Urquhart is right in figuring that MMP will be able to reach the referendum thresholds in any event. But with the Libs apparently both limiting any discussion about the effects of MMP and silencing a significant number of its supporters, the 60% number is only looking all the more daunting.