| · Retention fee
· Shipman inquiry
· Politicians
· Simvastatin
· EHC
· Careers in pharmacy
· Packaging
· Wildlife
· The Charter
· Council elections
Letters to the Editor
|
Council elections
No advantage to STV
From Mr M. L. Palmer, MRPharmS
The August Council meeting debate on the single
transferable vote system (STV) (PJ, 14 August, p235) made for an interesting read. The “old
guard” want a return to STV, arguing that this is more equitable
with all votes counting, that voting numbers have not increased under
the “first past the post” system, and that STV would encourage
a more balanced Council in terms of sectorial representation and a better
chance of minorities getting elected. I must thank the “new blood” in
the Council for blocking this motion.
All votes count under STV — this maybe so, but, since 1992 when
I was able to vote in Council elections, out of 84 Council places up
for grabs, only one place would have had a different person elected under
the opposing system. Changing the system again would not mean an increase
in any minorities or sectors; policies that people feel strongly about
voting for or against would.
Voting numbers have not increased — true — but this is not
because of a voting system. This is because pharmacists (and non-politicians
in general) are apathetic about any political process and only care about
politics when those in power make decisions that directly affect them.
For 99 per cent of the time, this is not the case. If decisions that
the pharmacy profession really care about are made by the Council, it
will make its voice heard, the Save Our Society campaign being a good
example. The increased activity, transparency and fresh ideas of the
current Council will increase voting by itself, not by changing the process
of voting.
Better representation of sector and minorities — the voting system
has never directly encouraged this. Ironically, three of those Council
members who highlighted this “advantage” of STV were also
against direct sectorial Council representation which would guarantee
hospital, industrial and academic participation in direct decision making.
It is interesting how the way the meetings are currently reported (news
style) make such links easier to spot and clearer to the membership than
a transcript format. Surely a plus point for transparency, I would say.
Martin Palmer
Bristol
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal