RICKY BLUE

Cheated, democratically of course

I voted in the demerger referendum on Sunday. It did not take long. I mention this fact just in case perhaps you did not vote even though you would have liked to keep your little town but thought it might be too much trouble and now you've lost it forever.

But let's get past that.

My polling station at Christmas Park School was efficient and well staffed. I was quickly ushered to a table where two scrutineers examined my identification, found me on a list, and gave me ballot.

I walked behind them to the little cardboard voting "booth." I read the question.

It was a confusing, true to the long tradition of confusing Quebec referendum questions.

Is there a law in Quebec that says a clear question can never be asked? Or, is it simply because the question will always be a transparent attempt by the government to confuse the electorate and thereby influence the result?

But let's get past that.

I already knew 'Yes' was the vote I wanted to make. I wrote an 'X'. Then I double-checked, remembering how votes in the last referendum had been rejected by scrutineers because they were not exactly right. I went back to my scrutineer to find out what kind of mark was allowed. He said I should darken the entire circle with the pencil. I did so.

So, let's move on.

My vote was not anti-Montreal. It was rather pro-my-little-town. Likewise, my vote was not an endorsement of the taxation-without-representation agglomeration council. It was pro-my-little-town.

Will the Quebec government get this message?

I did not vote for either of their imposed plans. The question might have been confusing but my answer was clear. I voted simply, purely and clearly to get my town back. Yes - like it was before! It was an act of clarity. A Clarity Act.

That is was what my vote said. And that is what all 'Yes' votes were saying.

We are sending you a message: We want our town back! Hello? Is anybody there? Can you hear us?

But let's get past that.

Later, I watched the returns on the Quebec news channel RDI. It was as confusing as the question. As the results scrolled along the bottom of the screen, each town was followed by the percentage vote for 'Oui', followed by another percentage and then the judgment: "Diffusé" (de-merged) or "Statut Quo" (stays).

Town after town scrolled by with a majority of 'Oui' votes for de-merger. But so many had statu quo after them.

Then I realized that the number in parenthesis was the percentage of voters needed to vote 'Yes' to pass the government imposed thirty-five per cent of the electorate bar.

So town after town whose voters had actually endorsed de-merger were being refused it, because all non-votes were being treated as 'No' votes.

I say that just in case you are the type of person who leaves democracy up to your fellow citizens and doesn't bother to vote because they think it will make no difference.

In St. Laurent, three out of four voters endorsed de-merger. Yet they will not be de-merged.

In Pierrefonds, two out of three voters endorsed de-merger, yet they too will not be de-merged.

This strikes me as being so clearly unfair. My little town of Beaconsfield will de-merge. But I feel bad for the others who have been cheated.

I guess I really can't get past that.