BC has rejected PR three times now

The first time, the majority voted FOR it. The BC Liberals however, set an arbitrary threshold of 60%. Also, in both of these cases STV was specified instead of the simpler and more representative MMPR. The second time, it was STV again. The third time, there wasn't any specification from what I understand.

That being said, there is no moral obligation for PR to be passed through a referendum. PR empowers voters in ridings that sway heavily towards one side. Right now, these voters have absolutely no representation. This isn't "representative" democracy.

If a government can form and make policies without majority support of the electorate, it can also pass electoral reform. Why do we need a referendum for it? Do we have referendums for all controversial policies?

"But a following government can easily roll back PR".

Not really, no. Unless a really really massive wave comes in, PR almost always guarantees no single party majority. No small party would be stupid enough to accept the roll back of PR.

Unfortunately, the implementation of PR is full of misinformation, people not understanding why it is better, and pet desires rather than a desire to improve the status quo.

True. But my question is, do we truly need the people to "understand"? If we do, then we ought to have direct democratic practices for other important bills too (like budgets) like they do in Switzerland. Selective direct democracy for electoral reform, while abusing structural loopholes to pass bills without majority support is hypocritical, is it not. I'm directing this at the BC NDP btw, not you.