One of the simplest, but most effective steps Vancouver could take to address growing feelings of disengagement is hiding right before our eyes.

Four years ago, voters in British Columbia were asked to choose between two voting systems: our current “First Past the Post” model and a proportional system called the “Single Transferable Vote” (STV). STV is used in Ireland, Australia and India and was endorsed by the B.C. Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform.

Proportional Representation (PR) allows new voices to be heard, eliminates “vote-splitting,” discourages negative campaigning, and fosters a collaborative political environment. At the national level, PR is used in 86 countries around the world. While opponents like to focus on less stable political cultures like Israel and Italy, they conveniently forget to mention that PR is also used in Japan, Spain and Sweden. In fact, almost every country in Europe uses proportional voting.

In a 2005 referendum, a majority of B.C. voters said yes to STV, but failed to meet the required 60 per cent threshold need to pass. In 2009 the proposal once again failed to reach 60 per cent support.

One of the biggest concerns that people had about STV was the idea of multi-member districts. Instead of having one MLA, under the new system you would have two, three or more in each riding. Some argued this would be confusing and could obscure the lines of accountability. Another concern was that the new ridings would be larger than our current boundaries. Rural voters in particular were worried about becoming politically diluted within the new boundaries.

But there is one place in B.C. where we could easily implement STV without having to change the electoral boundaries and without having to change the number of representatives in each district. That place is Vancouver.

Vancouver has 10 councillors, and they are all elected at-large, which means they each represent the entire city rather than small wards or ridings. Essentially, Vancouver is already a “multi-member district” just like the ones proposed by the Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform in 2004.

That’s probably one of the reasons why support for STV was eight per cent higher in Vancouver than the rest of the province in the 2009 referendums.

Perhaps British Columbians rejected STV because it was too many changes at once: a new kind of ballot, a multi-member district, and larger ridings. But in Vancouver, STV would require only one small change: a ranked ballot. Voters would rank their choices in order of preference and the parties would win seats in proportion to their votes. Vancouver would instantly become the first jurisdiction anywhere in Canada to use proportional representation — a huge breakthrough for the voting reform movement, and a monumental step away from the archaic First Past the Post.

STV is used for municipal governments in Scotland and New Zealand, and could be a great fit in B.C. But any change to Vancouver’s voting system requires approval from Victoria. On two occasions, 2005 and 2012, Vancouver City Council unanimously asked the province for permission to consider alternate voting systems. They are still waiting for an answer.