Editorial

The worst that could happen in the current impasse over electoral reform is to stop talking.

Both sides, it appears, agree on the basic ingredients of the cake they wish to bake. Both want the whole of Gozo to be considered as a single district, irrespective of its population. Both also want to see the introduction of a system of strict proportionality to avoid a repetition of the situations where the number of parliamentary seats credited to each political party is not a fair reflection of their strength at the ballot box.

The cooking gets sticky when issues such as governability and the drawing up of electoral boundaries come into play. Rather than arguing over how electoral boundaries are drawn, the focus clearly needs to shift towards a system where the districts do not actually influence the number of parliamentary seats which each political party wins.

The districts need to become relevant only for the voters to elect candidates they know best and who are most familiar with their localities. The number of elected candidates should be decided on the basis of the national percentage of the vote, calculated on the basis of the first count.

The present arrangement of having seats credited to the party that wins an absolute majority of votes, or a relative minority when only candidates from two parties are elected, is not good enough and must not be tolerated any longer.

A party might win a large enough majority of votes to be deserving of more than the single seat parliamentary majority the current system may give if not enough candidates are elected directly. And when candidates from more than two parties are elected to Parliament but none of them wins an absolute majority of votes, one could still have a party, by virtue of the way the districts are drawn, winning an absolute majority of parliamentary seats with fewer votes than the other parties combined.

Among the issues reportedly raised in the party talks was governability, including a suggestion that a party winning a relative majority in a three-horse race be credited extra parliamentary seats to remove the need for coalitions.

Malta experienced problems of governability in the 1950s, when four general elections were held between 1950 and 1955. It is a situation that does not do any country much good. But having a situation where political parties are over or under represented in the House is the more serious problem, striking at the heart of what should be "proportional representation". The choice of the people should come first.

Limitations on the voting rights of Maltese working and living abroad - yet still having strong ties with Malta - are antiquated, undemocratic and ripe for change.

The Prime Minister has now given notice of a Bill to amend the Constitution so that Gozo could again be reunited as a single electoral district. It is a Bill which would need a two-thirds majority to become law. The possibility has been raised, therefore, of negotiations over the microphones of the House. It has happened before and almost always failed. Proposed constitutional amendments in 1992 and 1996 over the election of the President, the appointment of constitutional bodies and other changes to the electoral system come readily to mind.

In a country where general elections are bitterly fought and tightly contested, it would be a disservice to the people if the political parties disagreed on the rules. The national interest and democratic principles need to come before partisan interests. The people must come first.