Will result ensure proportionality?

After Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi lost a confidence vote in the Senate last month, the country's President Giorgio Napolitano had no alternative but to dissolve parliament and thus pave the way for new elections which are being held on April 13 and 14.

Before that, however, he gave a mandate to the president of the Italian Senate, Franco Marini, to form a government with the specific task of reforming the electoral system. Marini gave up his mandate, since he could not find sufficient backing. Italian politicians have been debating whether the country should adopt a system similar to that of Germany, France, or Spain.

The satirical TV programme Striscia la Notizia (Canale 5), interviewed the controversial former President Francesco Cossiga and asked which electoral model he favoured. "Why not copy that of Ireland?" he asked.

Actually, Ireland's electoral system is the same as Malta's. This is a system of proportional representation (PR) by means of the single transferable vote (STV) and has been in force since 1921, when the British government first gave the island self-government. It was designed to give smaller parties a better chance of winning seats than they would have under the 'first-past-the-post' system used in Britain. In the event, four parties won seats in that first Maltese parliament.

The system has worked reasonably well since then, although some fine-tuning was necessary which was not always in keeping with the spirit of the original. Indeed, the Maltese Parliament always had more than two parties represented (except 1955-58) until 1966, when the small parties, which together had won nine seats in the 1962 election, failed to win a single seat. Since then only the Nationalist Party and the Labour Party have been represented in Parliament.

Contesting its fifth general election, Alternattiva Demokratika is urging voters to ensure that this time it is represented in Parliament, since this would break the 'duopoly' exercised by the Labour and Nationalist parties for so long. Its chairman, Harry Vassallo, has declared that AD would be ready to join a coalition government with the party which is prepared to implement all or most of its programme.

AD is no doubt emboldened by its very good showing in the European Parliament elections in June 2004, when its sole candidate, Arnold Cassola, obtained almost 23,000 first-count votes (about 9.5 per cent of the total) and then went on to inherit another 7,000 votes, mostly from Nationalist candidates. However, Dr Cassola failed to be elected, since he did not reach the quota, and Labour elected its third MEP to the Nationalists' two.

On that occasion, Malta and Gozo were turned into a single constituency, but only because just five seats were at stake. Malta is currently divided into 12 districts, with Gozo a separate district, each electing five MPs. The Constitution does not allow the size of each district to be higher or lower than five per cent of the national average. In view of demographic changes and movements of population, this makes it necessary to revise the electoral boundaries from time to time.

According to our system, in any five-member constituency, a substantial number of votes - up to 16 per cent - are 'wasted' since they would belong to the non-elected 'runner-up'. This is because the system, which is based on the preferences expressed by voters, was designed to ensure that all five MPs ideally reach the quota. Since not all voters give enough preferences (quite a few just mark No. 1, or No. 2, at most) their votes are not transferable. Votes may also be rendered non-transferable because of a mistake by the voter (such as by repeating the same number twice).

This is why the system, when establishing the quota, determines this by dividing the total number of valid votes in a district by one more than the number of candidates to be elected (five in our case), and adding one. Thus, in a district where 24,000 valid votes have been cast, the quota would be one-sixth of the total, i.e., 4,000, plus one. This is to ensure that only five candidates reach the quota. Usually, the number of 'wasted' votes belonging to one party in one district are compensated by much fewer 'wasted' votes in another, so the end result would be quite proportional.

However, in 1981, boundaries were redrawn in such a way that most of the wasted votes would belong to the Nationalist Party; in fact, in that two-party race, the PN would still have won only a minority of seats even with 54 per cent of the popular vote. In the event it won 51 per cent but three seats fewer than Labour, which went on to form a government.

The Constitutional amendment in 1987 - ensuring that the party obtaining the absolute majority of first-count votes would be given enough additional seats (in the event of another 'perverse' result) to have a one-seat overall majority - effectively meant that the No. 1 vote suddenly acquired vital importance. The system was fine-tuned in 1995 so that a party obtaining a relative majority (in the event of three or more parties contesting) would still get a one-seat overall majority - as long as only two parties win seats. Last year, the fine-tuning went further, so that if party A, although winning a relative majority of first-count votes, ends up winning fewer seats than party B, it would get additional seats in proportion to its majority over party B - and not just to give it majority of just one seat. If a third party wins even a single seat, however, no additional seats are allocated.

It is possible - though highly improbable - that AD will get the same number of votes it received in the European Parliament election. However, if these are evenly distributed in all districts, the party, despite winning almost 10 per cent of vote, would still fail to win a single seat. Its best bet would be to concentrate on one or two districts.

However, there is one solution which, while being faithful to the PR-STV system, would make the results of the Maltese elections more proportional - possibly without resorting to the fine-tuning carried out since 1987.

This would be to create fewer districts, electing a larger number of candidates. This could mean that while retaining Gozo as a separate district electing five MPs, Malta would be divided into just six districts electing nine candidates each, or eight districts electing seven. This would not only reduce the number of MPs, but also effectively lower the threshold in each of the Malta districts from 16.6 to 10 or 12.5 per cent. Also, given the size of the districts, they would probably not have to be changed come every election, since they would be large and diversified enough to absorb any demographic changes.

This will be a matter for the next Parliament to digest.