A full ward system is a first-past-the-post single member electoral district system. Implementing the full ward system at the local level in Vancouver would be implementing the same faulty system that is now used at the provincial and federal levels. It is widely acknowledged that the provincial system and federal system of first-past-the-post single member electoral districts or "wards" is a flawed system, so much so that, provincially in B.C., a Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform has been called to examine other systems and make a recommendation to the voting public. First-past-the-post single member ward systems are winner take all systems that suffer from unbalanced -- and sometimes wildly unbalanced -- election results, a sense of wasted votes, and "vote splitting" where there are more than two parties or candidates. This type of system experiences lower voter turnout and more non-participation when compared to other voting systems that incorporate proportionality or preferential voting.

Implementing the flawed full ward system now would mean that voters in Vancouver would be stuck with that system for decades. Only when pressed do COPE strategists and Berger Commission advisors/researchers say that it's a 'step towards' a better system.

Berger Commission advisors/researchers have examined the Vancouver Charter and in their opinion the City has the legal authority to change the existing "at large" system to only a full ward system or a "mixed system" without a change to the Vancouver Charter. In the Commission's opinion, to implement other systems or reforms, such as a proportional system with wards or implementing spending reforms, requires a change to the Vancouver Charter which would need to be done by the Provincial government. Either way, any change, including bringing in a wards system, requires provincial government approval through an Order In Council.

City Council has asked the Commission to report to Council on "other reforms for the improvement of civic democracy that would require amendments to the Vancouver Charter or other statutes in order to be implemented" and to "report to Council on the merits of the current at-large system, the ward system and other alternative systems." The Berger Commission has said that it "intends to make recommendations divided into two parts: What can the Council do on its own, and what will require provincial legislation."

It is fully within the mandate of the Commission to consider a proportional system or a proportional wards system. Further, within the commission's educational mandate we feel that the commission has an obligation to fairly present a proportional or a proportional wards system on par with the other three systems the Commission has presented. It is hypocritical of the commission to consider recommending spending limits and financial reporting requirements that would require a change to the Vancouver Charter while at the same time not consider proportional systems or preferential voting because they may require a change to the Vancouver Charter.

In that 1996 referendum, 59.43% of Vancouver voters indicated they would like to keep the existing system of electing councillors "at large" whereby all voters can vote for all councillors.