Voters and the exigencies of mathematical formulas

Our electoral system has served us pretty well – bar the 1981 perverse result – and with gerrymandering now rendered ineffective thanks to the corrective mechanism, there is little reason not to have districts with fixed boundaries that follow the reality

We need a system whereby the electoral mathematical formula is more subject to the political, social and historical perspective and not the other way around as is practically the case today. If electoral districts remained the same from election to election, as with local council elections, there would be a greater sense of stability, certainty and clarity for both the representatives and the represented.

If we are already following this logic for Gozo, I do not see why we cannot do the same for Santa Venera which has, once again, been divided into two. I cannot see why Ħal Farruġ, which is essentially part of Luqa and not of any other locality, has to be removed from the sixth district to serve as wedge for the fifth. I do not see why Kirkop, or other small villages, have to be moved from one district to another at some election or another. Voters are human beings and should not be treated as numbers serving the exigencies of a mathematical formula.

The case for a review

The Electoral Commission (albeit not unanimously) has presented proposals to Parliament to make changes to electoral boundaries. Such changes are not good for the voters. Voters, especially those from the smaller towns and villages, find themselves moved around simply to make up a district’s numbers. Communities have a political identity – thanks to the establishment of local councils in the early 1990s – and centuries-old social identities that are sometimes dismembered for the same purpose of adjusting electoral boundaries.

It can also cause problems for the MPs who represent the area, weakening the link be- tween them and their constituents. Some MPs have even lost their seat – not because of a loss of popularity but because changing boundaries splinters the core of their electoral support. It is hardly necessary to say that democratic outcomes should not be dependent upon how an imaginary line is drawn on a map.

Constitutional requirements

What does the Constitution say, specifically? Firstly, that districts must be of similar size in terms of the number of registered voters, not deviating by more than five per cent from the national average. A related requirement says that districts are to return the same number of members (except where the Constitution’s ‘corrective mechanism’ is triggered for the sake of proportionality) which must be between five and seven MPs. The number of districts must be odd and cannot be fewer than nine or more than 15.

The total number of MPs must be also odd and divisible by the number of districts. Exceptions can be made to the latter requirement, mathematically inevitable if all the districts elect the same number of MPs, if the corrective mechanism is put to work. Finally, Gozo and Comino are invariably to constitute a single, indivisible district.

With these criteria, boundaries have to change over time to reflect population changes. I believe the requirement was originally introduced in the 1970s to reduce (but not eliminate) the possibility of gerrymandering. As already argued, with gerrymandering now rendered ineffective, there is little reason not to have districts with fixed boundaries.

Blueprint for reform

District boundaries can be made more permanent and sensible by requiring that they conform to local council boundaries (they can also be required to respect regional boundaries established in the Local Councils Act).

To bring about the changes, only minimal amendments to the Constitution would be needed. Provisions concerning the number of districts (not less than nine, not more than 15) and number of members per district (not less than five, not more than seven) can and should be kept in order to ensure a Parliament of reasonable size and a reasonable number of MPs per district. The same goes for the requirement that the total number of MPs must be odd and the provision that Gozo and Comino remain as one district.

The requirement that district must be approximately the same size and return the same number of MPs, and that the number of MPs must be divisible by the number of districts, would be repealed. Differences in the number of registered voters in each district can be compensated for by apportioning a different number of MPs to each district according to the size of its population.

The reform in practice

Once these reforms are enacted, Malta will be divided into a number of electoral districts, the boundaries of which make sense from a political, social and historical perspective. I leave it to the constitutional experts to recommend the best legal way of achieving these ends.

An additional task for the Electoral Commission would be to recalculate, at specified periodic intervals, the proportionate number of MPs for every district to elect. The formula to determine this proportionality would be legally pre-established but only rarely would there be the need to change district boundaries. In fact, this would only be required in extreme cases in which the population of a district changes so much in comparison with the rest that the number of MPs apportioned to it would fall foul of the “not less than five or more than seven” rule.

Malta’s electoral map would be stabilised and certainty and clarity would be improved for both representatives and those they represent. No radical changes would be required to either the law or electoral procedures. A minimal intervention would contribute in no small way to a general enhancement of our political culture.