Who's dragging their feet now?

The deputy leader of the Labour Party, Michael Falzon, was recently reported as having stated that the Nationalist Party and the government have been dragging their feet on electoral reforms. The two basic bones of contention that he raised were voter eligibility and the counting system.

I will not dwell much on the first since it seems that the MLP has retained its basic stand that it wants to control who goes in and out of this country. Whether one uses embarkation cards or any other method does not change the principle from which the MLP is working. Even more ludicrous is the reported statement: "Once the law is there, it should be respected..." This is obviously so but the problem is that it is the law which needs to be changed! The government moved constitutional amendments in the previous legislature. They were not accepted by the MLP. That says it all.

Of more interest was the resurrection by Dr Falzon of the problems that affect our counting system, a matter trashed to death - to no avail - in the Gonzi Commission three legislatures ago.

The source of the problem is that votes are counted using the system of proportional representation which is designed to produce proportionality on a district basis only. The consequence is that the system may produce disproportionate results on a national level simply because it was not designed for this purpose.

For various reasons, everyone now agrees that proportionality should be on a national level rather than on a district level. We have tried to square the circle through a number of constitutional amendments which, while undoubtedly useful, still do not produce the desired proportionality at a national level. Dr Falzon rightly argues that we should once again have a look at the problem and rather than making makeshift arrangements change the method of counting.

I agree but Dr Falzon needs to get his party to think on two essential points on which the Gonzi Commission actually floundered.

The system itself is actually irrelevant since there are a number of tried and tested systems one can adopt which give national proportionality while keeping our traditional method of vote marking. The Gonzi Commission had agreed that the D'Hondt method was probably the best suited but any other system could be adopted as long as it is mathematically foolproof in achieving the desired end - national proportionality.

All national proportional systems, however, require two basic decisions, decisions which the MLP refused to take in the Gonzi Commission and which need to be taken if the present system is changed.

Firstly, there has to be a national threshold, namely a percentage of votes achieved by a party at national level which, if achieved, would qualify the party for seats in parliament. In the Gonzi Commission, the PN had suggested five per cent of the votes at national level. Alternattiva Demokratika had agreed. The MLP never came back! The percentage itself is arbitrary and could be higher or lower according to what principle you want to favour. There is nothing right or wrong in determining the national quota, merely political decision making. It seems to me that the MLP has not taken this decision yet.

Secondly, one has to decide what to do with the first preference votes of the parties that do not achieve the national quota and, consequently, are eliminated. The choice is either to throw them in the dustbin or to transfer them (according to the following preferences) to the parties which have achieved the national quota. In the Gonzi Commission, both the PN and AD had favoured transferring the votes. Once again, the MLP remained mum!

I would recommend that Dr Falzon determines the current MLP thinking on these two issues before he suggests further talks on the matter. Otherwise it would just be a waste of time.