A few days ago, Parliament approved the formation of the electoral districts valid for the coming election, which constitutionally needs to be held sometime in the next 18 months.
The House accepted the recommendations presented by the Electoral Commission, rejecting the minority report put forward by the representatives of the Nationalist Party. The commission’s report was endorsed by the PL representatives and chairman, but remained unsigned by the PN delegates, who presented their own proposals.
The split had been highlighted late last year when the commission presented its report to Parliament.
With the Labour Party enjoying a majority in Parliament, it was easy to predict that the commission’s report would have made it through. And this is what happened.
The changing of electoral districts is a practice that takes place once every five years, taking into consideration the demographic changes which would have occurred in the period between one election and another.
Should there be a more permanent solution to eliminate the need to carry out such an exercise each time an election is approaching?
The system
The system we have in place in Malta establishes that, with the exception of Gozo, the remaining 12 districts cannot be more than five per cent bigger or smaller than the average quota.
In the current scenario, with the Electoral Commission basing its numbers on the Electoral Register published in March 2020, there were 323,059 registered voters (excluding Gozo). The average quota for the 12 electoral districts was 26,922.
All the 12 districts in Malta therefore needed to be either larger or smaller by not more than 1,346 votes – a maximum of 28,268 and a minimum of 25,576.
As things stood at the time of the report, demographics showed that the seventh and 12th districts were both larger than the quota by six per cent (6.75 per cent in the seventh district, and 6.31 in the 12th). This meant that changes needed to be made to bring the seventh and 12th district within the range.
Gozo, as said, is a separate story since, in 2008, it had been decided to always keeping it as one district. Before the 2008 election, it had been realised that Gozo would have exceeded the five per cent threshold. For a time, it had been debated that Ghajnsielem would have been separated from Gozo and “annexed” to the 12th district, but it had then been established that Gozo should be treated as one district independently of the number of registered voters.
For the next election Gozo will have more than 30,000 voters, by far the largest district and by far exceeding the five per cent line. But it will remain as one district anyway.
What the commission proposed
The Electoral Commission proposed that some roads in the seventh and 12th district are shifted respectively to the sixth and 10th district. It must also be remembered that localities forming a district have to be geographically touching each other.
To take an extreme case as an example, Mellieha and Marsaxlokk can never be in the same district, but San Gwann and St Julian’s – at present respectively in the ninth and 10th districts – can one day be within the same district if needs be, because they share a border.
What the commission proposed – and this was eventually approved by Parliament – is that about 1,320 voters in some streets in Zebbug which border Qormi are moved from the seventh district to the sixth, and that around 1,200 electors in streets on the outskirts of Naxxar (near the cemetery) are shifted to the 10th district.
In this way, the seventh and 12th district were brought within the five per cent limit, while the seventh and the 10th also remained inside the parameters in spite of the additional electors.
Minority report
The minority report submitted by the four representatives of the PN on the Electoral Commission suggested wider changes.
These included a re-composition of most of the districts – always keeping in mind the five per cent threshold explained earlier – and the idea was to as much as possible avoid the division of localities into two electoral districts.
The argument made was that localities as established for local council elections should not be separated in two. The changes to the districts, the PN representatives said, should not be cosmetic and simply pick some streets from one district and place them in another, but should be more comprehensive.
According to the minority report, the only two “divisions” suggested were the hiving off of Guardamangia from Pieta’ and Hal Farrug from Luqa.
It was suggested that Guardamangia, recognised as distinct from Pieta’ although falling under the Pieta’ local council, is added to the first district with the rest of Pieta’ joining the ninth. Hal Farrug, it was proposed, would be moved from the fourth to the sixth district.
These suggestions were rejected.
Candidates
Candidates contesting the election are the most affected when changes to the district boundaries are made. This is more so considering that these changes occur in the last third of the legislative term, which gives candidates hit by the changes little time to adjust.
It is, to say the least, quite unfair that a chunk of the electorate is moved from one district to another so close to election date. For some candidates, this would mean that their voter base is divided in two. We all know that a few votes make a big difference in the single-transferable vote system we embrace, and having electors being shifted from one district to another can jeopardise a candidate’s chances.
In the last election, candidates needed around 3,800-4,000 votes to be elected from a district in Malta (4,300 in Gozo). So the moving of between 1,200 and 1,300 votes as has happened in the seventh and 12th district this time round does make a significant difference to candidates in those particular districts.
Changes to the electoral boundaries force candidates to move to districts they would otherwise not consider contesting. But there have been occasions in the past that candidates failed to get elected because their voter base was split. And it could happen again.
What is also irritating to these candidates is that there is no guarantee that the districts will remain the same in five years’ time, meaning that they find themselves having to readjust at every election. The voter base they worked hard with may no longer be eligible to vote for them next time round.
Fixed boundaries
Should the idea of having fixed boundaries be considered?
The idea is to have the establishment of permanent electoral districts, and having them remain unchanged irrespective of demographical changes. In this way, candidates – and electors – would know how the districts are composed from one election to another.
This system would have its flaws too. The major one is that there could be a situation with very large districts and other much smaller ones. This would mean that some candidates would need, say, 5,000 votes to be elected, while others would need half that.
Since we have a representative democracy, MPs are elected by more or less the same number of electors (this is why there is the five per cent range explained earlier), establishing a level playing field. Having much bigger and much smaller districts would not be conducive to having a fair and equal chance of success.
An exception has been made for Gozo and there, given that the number of voters is higher than any other district in Malta, candidates need to obtain many more votes than their counterparts on the mainland.
The 2008 decision on the Gozo district set a precedent, but as things stand now the parties have no interest in transposing the idea to Malta. Electoral districts will continue to change every five years, much to the candidates’ chagrin.
One district
Should we, instead, have Malta and Gozo as one district?
We have this experience in elections for Members of the European Parliament. Each party fields a number of candidates who, together with individuals who contest as independent contenders, are on one single ballot sheet that is the same for the whole of the country.
It would get more complicated if this system is used for the general election. For one thing, the list of candidates for an MEP election is relatively short, so it makes it manageable. But there is a huge difference in general elections because not six, but 65 candidates have to be elected. Tens contest an MEP election, but the number of candidates for the general election runs into hundreds. Imagine how long the ballot sheet would have to be if there’s only one district.
Such a system would only be possible if voting is allowed electronically, but the political parties are still very far away from moving in that direction.
It took us decades to move from manual counting to electronic counting. This took place only two years ago for the last MEP election, and is set to be in place also for the next general election.
But, as to electronic voting, maybe before the end of the century we will get there.
Maybe.