Thank you for your coverage of the recommendations of the Ontario Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform and the upcoming referendum on a proportional voting system for Ontario elections (Form of proportional representation proposed for Ontario - Sentinel, April 25, 2007).

This is a critical issue, but under-reported. This decision will affect the future of Ontario politics, and we will need to make an informed choice.

John Reston and Edmund James and the 101 other ordinary citizens from every riding in the province who found themselves unexpectedly immersed in this historic exercise in participatory democracy are to be thanked profusely for the sacrifice and hard work they have committed, and congratulated on the recommendations they have produced, notwithstanding that James was one of the few opposed.

He called our current system "the grand, timehonoured Westminster system," and so it is. The Citizens' Assembly was, I think, wise to choose the mixed member proportional system, pioneered in postwar Germany and now in use in New Zealand, Scotland and Wales, which preserves the current firstpast the-post system intact, but reinforces it with a structure of proportionality by means of a provincewide tier of additional MPPs.

Why do we need more politicians? Ontarians were already seriously underrepresented when the size of the legislature was reduced from 130 to 103 in 1999. The Citizens' Assembly heard passionate arguments in favour of increasing the legislature to 170 or 180 seats or more, but chose to recommend a modest increase to 129 seats overall in the new Ontario Legislature.

With more MPPs at work, the citizens of Ontario will all be better represented. Those who vote for winning candidates in their ridings will continue to earn the gratitude of those they elect. But the rest of us will also have representation, from the 35 list members. We will have more women and more minorities in Parliament. All voters in every area of the province will have representation, and we will finally have accountable government.

Single member plurality leads to government that gets things done, James argued. What have they got done lately? Coalitions work better for all of us.

"SMP is people oriented, rather than just lists for parties, and includes women politicians and party members, gays and people for ethnic families," he stated. The reality is that Ontario has 24 per cent women in our legislature. The Parliament of Canada is 21 per cent women. We have been stuck at these levels for decades. It is a national disgrace. Every country that elects at least 30 per cent women has a proportional voting system (except Cuba). There are more than 20 of them, including Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Belgium and Holland, and over 80 countries around the world that use proportional voting systems.

James went on to compare first-past-the-post voting to competing for the Stanley Cup or an Olympic medal. But government is not a trophy, and our current voting system is not competitive. Most of us live in safe ridings. We already know who will get elected in our riding before the votes are cast. Most of us as voters have few real choices, or none at all.

But believe it or not, elections are not all about winners and losers. They are about choosing our representatives, and all of us are entitled to representation. With proportional representation, we are all winners, because almost every vote makes a difference to the outcome of the election, every vote helps to elect someone. By making every vote count, a fair voting system puts real power into the hands of voters.

I share Councillor Bill Cober's concern that the referendum will not be adequately promoted. It's a good thing to look at, indeed.

Start by looking at the Citizens' Assembly Web site a t http://www.citizensassembly .gov.on.ca

Pay particular attention to the Meet the Members page.

When you want to know more, look at the Fair Vote Canada Web site at http://www.fairvote.ca

Wayne Smith,

Toronto