Best line from the last thread was from Stuart Parker:
I am completely baffled by anyone who would choose to keep a completely disproportional system because its replacement isn't proportional enough. Voters in BC will be given a choice between two systems. One will be more proportional than the other.
I would love to hear from STV opponents how FPTP is a better system thatn STV because the superiority of systems that will not be appearing on anyone's ballot are a complete irrelevancy. Voting for FPTP because STV is insufficiently proportional is like voting for the Conservative Party of Canada because the Communist Party has failed to nominate a candidate in your riding.
There are four districts on the BC-STV map that are smaller (= less proportional) than one would like, although they were unavoidable:
The Northeast (Peace River) has two MLAs. That's no problem for the NDP: it's almost certain to win one of the two.
The Northwest has three MLAs. The NDP won two of those seats in 2005, and has to be the favourite to win two of the three under STV as well.
North Central (Prince George) has three MLAs. Currently all Liberals. The NDP is certain to win one of the three under STV.
Okanagan-Boundary has three MLAs. That's NDP federally. Does anyone have the numbers for the 2005 vote transposed into the new seats of Boundary-Similkameen, Penticton,and Westside-Kelowna? West Kootenay - Boundary was so heavily NDP that I wonder if the NDP could win Boundary-Similkameen, and Penticton was far from hopeless. Anyway, the NDP is sure to win at least one of those three seats under STV.
Looks reasonably proportional to me.