Election system fix a start

A majority of Caymanian citizens are frustrated with and distrustful of our political party system and blame it for much of the divisions, which now exist in our three-Islands community. But have created yet another point of contention by now wanting to change our electoral system from multi-member to single-member constituencies.  

Although, my service between 1996 and 2001 in a multi-member constituency did not prevent me from establishing an office and becoming our first full time MLA (before government began to provide as subsidy to MLA’s to open offices); and act as a citizen intermediary, I have become a proponent of the one person one vote. My support centres on the relative merits of fairness, the production of a clear winner, and the improved level of contact between elected representatives and citizens that single member constituencies could foster.  

Worldwide, proponents of the one person one vote argue that the single member plurality system encourages all elected representatives to take heed of the views of all their constituents in a manner that is not replicated by any multi-member proportional system. Their re-election depends not just on the judgement of the party faithful, but on that of the electorate at large. As a result elected representatives have an incentive to develop a reputation as an effective local advocate by taking up the problems of individual citizens, or indeed of the local community as a whole, with government officials. To fulfil this role they may hold local ‘surgeries’, or events that enable citizens to bring them their problems. They will certainly make themselves available to be contacted and they may write letters to civil servants, government ministers or even private organisations on behalf of those who come to them. If the matter appears important enough they may even take the opportunity to raise it at some forum within the legislature. 

For the individual representative the aim of the activity is clear. It is that the development of a reputation as an effective local advocate will, come the next election time, give her or him a ‘personal vote’ that may assist in her or his re-election. For the democratic system itself there are said to be benefits. First, it means that elected representatives are made aware that there is a problem with the implementation if public policy runs into difficulties. If several constituents present an elected representative with the same issue, i.e. police harassment, unfairness, they may thereby learn that the relevant policing policies are proving unfair and will start lobbying decision makers to makes changes. Thus the development of public policy is constantly informed by feedback on its performance on the ground. Second, the intermediary work of elected representatives provides a vital mechanism for ensuring that government does not become arbitrary or overbearing. If citizens feel that they have been rendered an injustice in say, the administration of the courts, or social payments, they know that there is someone to whom they can turn with authority to intercede on their behalf. And of course awareness on the part of bureaucracies that citizens my turn to their elected representatives for help give them an incentive to ensure that their decisions are not considered arbitrary or overbearing in the first place. 

In short, the single member plurality system could encourage elected representatives to remain in contact with citizens and for citizens to feel that there is someone in the political system willing to act on their behalf. The result should be a citizenry that is more satisfied with its elected representatives and indeed with the democratic system as a whole thereby helping to foster the legitimacy of the political system.  

And as we well know the political system in these Islands is in serious danger of being viewed by a larger number of us as lacking relevance to our daily lives. And changing our electoral system will not by itself give us back our dignity or the feeling of being in control of our destinies. Political activists, political parties and all interested in improving our democracy should therefore begin to pay serious attention to our disadvantageous status; especially those of us that our own democracy has been used to criminalise and exclude from earning a decent living. For, what will it matter for us to gain fairness in our election system, when those that disrespect, arrest, judge and guard us in prison and can legally call themselves something other than Caymanian, continue to administer our system in such a manner that it destroys those of us who can claim a legal right to live nowhere else but here; or call ourselves anything other than Caymanian.