Sunteți pe pagina 1din 36

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

COMPARATIVE NUMBER OF SEATS UNDER FIRST PAST THE POST AND REFORMED
70 60 50 40 30 32 22 18 38 60 60 54

65 57 57 48 42 41 48 41

SEATS

30 20 10 3 0

19

6 0 2 0 1 1 1 1

Labour PartyPMSD

Labour Party MMM

Labour Party PMXD

Labour Party PMXD

Labour Party MSM - PMSD

MMP & HP

MMSM

MMM MSM

MMM MSM

MSM-MMMMTD

Parti Gaetan Duval

MSM MMR

MDN Raj Dayal

1991

1995 DATE FPTP Seats

2000

2005

REFORMED (FPTP+RU+ PR)

The need to take the reforms of the electoral system seriously in Mauritius The debate on Electoral Reforms and the need for an equitable representation of the political parties in the parliament has been long going. Many propositions have been made by the MMM but each time the Prime Minister has used an excuse to reject the suggestions made by the MMM. It is a matter of fact that together with doing the tasks of the opposition, the MMM has brought forward many propositions which ought to be brought forward by the legitimate Government of Mauritius. Unfortunately there is no willingness on behalf of the honorable Dr Navinchandra Ramgoolam, Prime Minister of Mauritius, to enhance the democratic process in the Republic of Mauritius. It has been more than 40 years that our country has been independent and we are still using the same electoral system which has been in place since 1968 and up to now we are still classifying our citizen in terms of ethnic communities. If there is a will on behalf of the Prime Minister, he should by himself find the numerous alternatives for the electoral reforms which at the end of the day, will bring the same results. I will try through this paper to depict one of the ways and means of bringing the reforms in the electoral system without too much disrupting the conduct of the elections and results obtained in Mauritius. For this exercise, I have limited myself to the 20 constituencies in Mauritius. However the same principle will apply should we decide to include the constituency of Rodrigues. We have 20 constituencies whereby 3 candidates are elected in each constituency through the process of First Past The Post (FPTP). We have had up to date 8 additional candidates elected on the basis of the Best Loser System (BLS). There has been many debates and the MMM is a fervent proponent to maintain the Best Loser System in the proposed Reform of the Electoral System. The Labour Party has taken a different view and want at all means to eliminate the process of the BLS. Through this paper, I will try to satisfy both parties, whereby the BLS is maintained or eliminated dependent on the way that one sees it. It is crystal clear that I am a very strong opponent of communal classification of our people whether be it candidates or not and that I will never prone maintaining BLS in terms of communal classification.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 1

10/6/2012

MMMUNMMSD

2010

FSN

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

I have started the analysis of the results as from the elections of 1991 and continued to 1995 as I wanted to analyze the results of at least one occurrence where we have had a 60-0 result. 1991 Elections For the elections of 1991, the results have been as follows:
1991 Elections - Party's votes percentage

Labour Party-PMSD Votes%, 39.30 MSM-MMM-MTD Votes % , 55.40

MSM-MMM-MTD Votes %

Labour Party-PMSD Votes%

The MMM-MSM-MTD alliance got 55.40 percent of the votes in its favour whereas the Labour Party-PMSD alliance scored 39.30 % of the votes. However on the percentage of seats at the Legislative Assembly the MMM-MSM-MTD alliance obtained 95 % and the LP-PMSD only 5 %. This disproportionate in the allocation of seats is due to the system of First Past the Post (FPTP).

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 2

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1991 Elections - 60 FPTP - Party's Seats Percentage

Labour Party-PMSD Seats %, 5.00

MSM MMM MTD Seats %, 95.00

MSM MMM MTD Seats %

Labour Party-PMSD Seats %

There is a consensus to remove the disparity between the percentage of votes and the percentage of seats. Henceforth, a dose of proportional representation has been recommended by the various commissions put in place by the different governments in place. It has been recommended to keep the existing 60 candidates elected through the system of First Past The Post and on top of add a number of elected candidates through the system of Proportional Representation. On an earlier document, I have already simulated the results of the past elections in Mauritius using the proportional representation on top of the system of FPTP. The allocation of each additional seat under the Proportional Representation is clearly defined on my previous document at http://www.scribd.com/doc/102078630/Best-Loser-System-and-Proportional-Representation After discussions among all the political parties in Mauritius, consensus has been reached as follows: Parties which reach the threshold of 7.5 % are going to be considered for the Proportional Representation. We will apply this threshold for PR representation We are now going to apply the above in simulation to the past elections as from 1991 to 2010. Let us take the example of the elections of 1991 when we had the following results. The MMM-MSM-MTD alliance obtained 944,521 votes, representing 55.40 % and secured 57 seats in the parliament The Labour Party PMSD alliance obtained 670,631 votes, representing 39.30 percent and secured only 3 seats in the parliament We would apply the formula from the recommendations of the Sachs Commission.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 3

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

cast

We are discarding from consideration all parties who have polled less than 7.5% of the total votes

We divide the total number of votes polled by each party having polled 7.5% or more of the votes [a] by the aggregate of one (1) and the number of candidates of that party who have been returned at the level of the 21 constituencies (1+ b); The formula to be applied will therefore be [ a / (1+b)]. In other words, where a party has, say, 60 returned candidates at constituency level, the number of votes polled by that party in respect of its party list is divided by 61. The result is the PR figure. The PR Figure of each party indicates whether that party is underrepresented. Where a party has a high PR figure, this means that it is underrepresented and, as a result, the first additional seat shall be allocated to the party with the highest PR figure; Since the allocation of that first additional seat may have upset the representation of parties, another PR figure needs to be recalculated by dividing the total number of votes polled by that party (a) by the aggregate of one (1) and the number of seats held by that party as a result of the previous exercise. This process shall carry on until all 20 additional seats have been allocated. The following tables indicate how the compensatory system would have worked Therefore after the exercise of the additional seat allocation through PR, the setup post 1991 General Elections would have been as follows: MMM-MSM-MTD = 57 Seats Labour Party - PMSD = 23 Seats (20 Seats from Party-List) Total = 80 seats (Not considering the seats of Rodrigues)

The results of 60 seats under the FPTP system and then Proportional Representation are given in the table below. Please note that a deviation percentage is calculated after each seat added under PR system. The deviation percentage is the difference between the seat allocated percentage and the votes obtained percentage.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 4

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Vote % Relative % Additional Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

MSM MMM MTD Votes 944,521 65.17 76.65 PR Value 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84 16,284.84

1991 ELECTIONS 60 FPTP + PR Labour Labour PartyMSM MMM Party-PMSD PMSD MTD Seats Votes Seats 57 670,631 3 19.85 23.35 PR Value 167,657.75 134,126.20 111,771.83 95,804.43 83,828.88 74,514.56 67,063.10 60,966.45 55,885.92 51,587.00 47,902.21 44,708.73 41,914.44 39,448.88 37,257.28 35,296.37 33,531.55 31,934.81 30,483.23 29,157.87

MSM MMM MTD Seats % 95.00

Labour PartyPMSD Seats % 5.00

57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

93.44 91.94 90.48 89.06 87.69 86.36 85.07 83.82 82.61 81.43 80.28 79.17 78.08 77.03 76.00 75.00 74.03 73.08 72.15 71.25

6.56 8.06 9.52 10.94 12.31 13.64 14.93 16.18 17.39 18.57 19.72 20.83 21.92 22.97 24.00 25.00 25.97 26.92 27.85 28.75

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 5

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Labour PartyLabour PartyMSM-MMMMSDP MSM MMM MSDP Seats Deviation Seats MTD Votes % Votes% MTD Seats % % % 60 55.40 39.30 95.00 5.00 73.90 61 55.40 39.30 93.44 6.56 70.79 62 55.40 39.30 91.94 8.06 67.77 63 55.40 39.30 90.48 9.52 64.85 64 55.40 39.30 89.06 10.94 62.03 65 55.40 39.30 87.69 12.31 59.28 66 55.40 39.30 86.36 13.64 56.63 67 55.40 39.30 85.07 14.93 54.05 68 55.40 39.30 83.82 16.18 51.55 69 55.40 39.30 82.61 17.39 49.12 70 55.40 39.30 81.43 18.57 46.76 71 55.40 39.30 80.28 19.72 44.46 72 55.40 39.30 79.17 20.83 42.23 73 55.40 39.30 78.08 21.92 40.06 74 55.40 39.30 77.03 22.97 37.95 75 55.40 39.30 76.00 24.00 35.90 76 55.40 39.30 75.00 25.00 33.90 77 55.40 39.30 74.03 25.97 31.95 78 55.40 39.30 73.08 26.92 30.05 79 55.40 39.30 72.15 27.85 28.20 80 55.40 39.30 71.25 28.75 26.40 It is to be noted that for the elections of 1991, for a scenario of 60 Seats under FPTP and then PR representation, a PR number of 20 gives the least deviation.

1991 Elections - 60 FPTP + PR - Party's Seat Percentage


100 80
Percentage

60 40 20 0 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Number of Seats MSM-MMM-MTD Votes % MSM MMM MTD Seats % Labour Party-MSDP Votes% Labour Party-MSDP Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 6

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

The Best Loser System So far we have seen that 4 seats under the Best Loser System have been used to bring the communal balance in the parliament. All these 4 seats have been allocated from the number of candidates who stood at elections and who were not elected. If we increase the number of BEST LOSERS from 8 to 20, the probability that the 4 seats are represented on communal considerations is higher. However since there will be no classification of candidates under communities, it will be the responsibility of the parties to ensure that they have as candidates members of all communities of Mauritius. If any party does not include any community in its candidates list it is taking the risk of not being elected for Government. Henceforth, 60 Seats under FPTP are allocated and 20 seats under Best Loser System. We will not term the seats of all candidates who came as RUNNER UP (RU), i.e. ranked 4th position in the electoral results under the Best Loser System to distinguish the difference between the current Best Loser System and the proposed one, which is the taking de facto all seats of the 4th position. We would henceforth term it RU or LOSERS seat.

1991 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 LOSERS (4th Rank) - Party's Seat Percentage

Labour Party-PMSD Seats %, 25.00

MSM MMM MTD Seats %, 75.00

MSM MMM MTD Seats %

Labour Party-PMSD Seats %

Only by adding 20 seats by taking one from each constituency, ie the 4th rank in each constituency, the seat percentage is adjusted as follows: 25 % for the Labour Party PMSD alliance and 75 % for the MMM-MSMMSD alliance. The Number of seats of the Labour Party PMSD alliance is increased from 3 to 20 and that of the MMM-MSM-MSD alliance from 57 to 60. The deviation is reduced from 73.90 % to 33.90 %. So far we have just increased then number of seats for the best losers whereby we have tacked the problem of the communities representativity and narrow the gap for the disparity on seats allocation in the parliament. The electoral reforms will be incomplete without adding a dose of proportional representation. We will apply the same principle as above for PR representation, but this time the number of initial elected candidates has been increased from 60 to 80 ( 60 elected through First Past The Post and one from each (runner-up) of the 20 constituencies. We would apply the same formula as mentioned above. cast We are discarding from consideration all parties who have polled less than 7.5% of the total votes

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 7

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

We divide the total number of votes polled by each party having polled 7.5% or more of the votes [a] by the aggregate of one (1) and the number of candidates of that party who have been returned at the level of the 21 constituencies (1+ b); The formula to be applied will therefore be [ a / (1+b)]. In other words, where a party has, say, 60 returned candidates at constituency level, the number of votes polled by that party in respect of its party list is divided by 61. The result is the PR figure. The PR Figure of each party indicates whether that party is underrepresented. Where a party has a high PR figure, this means that it is underrepresented and, as a result, the first additional seat shall be allocated to the party with the highest PR figure; Since the allocation of that first additional seat may have upset the representation of parties, another PR figure needs to be recalculated by dividing the total number of votes polled by that party (a) by the aggregate of one (1) and the number of seats held by that party as a result of the previous exercise. This process shall carry on until all 20 additional seats have been allocated. The following tables indicate how the compensatory system would have worked for Therefore after the exercise of the additional seat allocation through PR on the 80 seats , the setup post 1991 General Elections would have been as follows: MMM-MSM-MTD = 60 Seats (57 FPTP + 3 RU) Labour Party - PMSD = 30 Seats (3 FPTP + 17 RU + 10 PR ) Total = 90 seats (Not considering the seats of Rodrigues)

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 8

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

+ 20 Losers Vote % Relative % Add. Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1991 ELECTIONS 60 FPTP + 20 LOSERS + PR Labour MSM Labour PartyMMM MTD MSM MMM Party-PMSD PMSD Votes MTD Seats Votes Seats 944,521 57 670,631 3 944,521 60 670,631 20 65.17 19.85 76.65 23.35 PR Value PR Value 15,483.95 60 31,934.81 21 15,483.95 60 30,483.23 22 15,483.95 60 29,157.87 23 15,483.95 60 27,942.96 24 15,483.95 60 26,825.24 25 15,483.95 60 25,793.50 26 15,483.95 60 24,838.19 27 15,483.95 60 23,951.11 28 15,483.95 60 23,125.21 29 15,483.95 60 22,354.37 30

MSM MMM MTD Seats % 95.00 75.00

Labour PartyPMSD Seats % 5.00 25.00

74.07 73.17 72.29 71.43 70.59 69.77 68.97 68.18 67.42 66.67

25.93 26.83 27.71 28.57 29.41 30.23 31.03 31.82 32.58 33.33

We have the percentage of seats allocation per party/alliance as follows: MSM-MMMMTD Votes % 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 55.40 Labour PartyPMSD Votes% 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 39.30 MSM MMM MTD Seats % 95.00 75.00 74.07 73.17 72.29 71.43 70.59 69.77 68.97 68.18 67.42 66.67 Labour PartyPMSD Seats % 5.00 25.00 25.93 26.83 27.71 28.57 29.41 30.23 31.03 31.82 32.58 33.33 Deviation % 73.90 33.90 32.05 30.24 28.48 26.76 25.08 23.43 21.83 20.26 18.73 17.23

Seats 60 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90

Therefore the number of seats in simulation to the elections of 1991 would have been 60 sets under FPTP, 20 Seats under Best Loser + either 10 under the PR representativity.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 9

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1991 Elections - 90 Seats (60 elected + 20 loser + 10 PR) Party's pourcentage

Labour PartyPMSD Seats %, 33.33

MSM MMM MTD Seats %, 66.67

MSM MMM MTD Seats %

Labour Party-PMSD Seats %

1991 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + PR - Party's seat percentage


100 90 80 70

Percentage

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

60

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

Number of Seats MSM-MMM-MTD Votes % MSM MMM MTD Seats % Labour Party-PMSD Votes% Labour Party-PMSD Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 10

10/6/2012

100

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

The whole exercise can be summarized in the table below: 1991 ELECTIONS in % Seats 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR MSMMMM-MTD Votes % 55.40 55.40 55.40 Labour PartyPMSD Votes% 39.30 39.30 39.30 MSM MMM MTD Seats % 95.00 81.43 71.25 Labour Party-PMSD Seats % 5.00 18.57 28.75 Deviation 73.90 46.76 26.40

55.40 55.40 55.40

39.30 39.30 39.30

75.00 66.67 60.00

25.00 33.33 40.00

33.90 17.23 3.90

The same exercise will be done for the other elections as well, i.e 1995, 2000, 2005 and 2010.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 11

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1995 Elections In 1995, the Labour Party-MMM alliance received 1,084,236 votes representing 65.17 percent of votes whereas the MSM-RMM alliance received 330219 votes representing 19.85 percent of total votes. In terms of seats, the Labour Party-MMM alliance received 60 seats representing 100 percent of seats whereas the MSM-MMR alliance received NO seat representing 0 percent of total seats.

1995 Elections - Party's Votes Percentage

MSM-MMR Votes %, 19.85

Labour Party-MMM Votes % , 65.17

Labour Party-MMM Votes %

MSM-MMR Votes %

1995 Elections - 60 FPTP - 0% Party's Seat Percentage


0% 0% 0%

100%

Labour Party-MMM Seats % MMP & HP 2 Seats %

MSM-MMR Seats % MMSM 1 Seat %

Parti Gaetan Duval 3 Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 12

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

In a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under PR, the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-MMM : 62 Seats (60 FPTP + 2 PR), 77.50 % MSM-MMR: 18 Seats ( 0 FPTP + 18 PR), 22.50 % 1995 ELECTIONS Labour PartyMMM Labour PartyVotes MMM Seats 1084236 60 65.17 76.65 PR Value 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,487.68

Vote % Relative % Additional Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

MSMMMR Votes 330219 19.85 23.35 PR Value 330,219.00 165,109.50 110,073.00 82,554.75 66,043.80 55,036.50 47,174.14 41,277.38 36,691.00 33,021.90 30,019.91 27,518.25 25,401.46 23,587.07 22,014.60 20,638.69 19,424.65 18,345.50 17,379.95 17,379.95

MSMMMR Seats 0

Labour PartyMMM Seats % 100.00

MSMMMR Seats % 0.00

60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 61 62

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 18

98.36 96.77 95.24 93.75 92.31 90.91 89.55 88.24 86.96 85.71 84.51 83.33 82.19 81.08 80.00 78.95 77.92 76.92 77.22 77.50

1.64 3.23 4.76 6.25 7.69 9.09 10.45 11.76 13.04 14.29 15.49 16.67 17.81 18.92 20.00 21.05 22.08 23.08 22.78 22.50

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 13

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1995 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 PR

MSM-MMR Seats, 22.50

Labour Party-MMM Seats , 77.50

Labour Party-MMM Seats

MSM-MMR Seats

In 1995, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System, the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-MMM: 60 Seats (60 FPTP + 0 RU), 75.00 % MSM-MMR: 14 Seats (0 FPTP + 14 RU), 17.50 % Parti Gaetan Duval: 3 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU), 3.75 % MMP & HP: 2 Seat (0 FPTP + 2 RU), 2.5 % MMSM: 1 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU), 1.25 %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 14

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1995 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 LOSERS - Party's seat percentage


1.25 2.5 3.75

17.5

75

Labour Party-MMM Seats % MMP & HP 2 Seats %

MSM-MMR Seats % MMSM 1 Seat %

Parti Gaetan Duval 3 Seats %

1995 Elections with 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + Proportional Representation In 1995, in a configuration of a total of 90 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post, 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System and 10 seats under PR , the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-MMM: 65 Seats (60 FPTP + 0 RU + 5 PR ), 72.22 % MSM-MMR: 19 Seats (0 FPTP + 14 RU + 5 PR), 21.11 % Parti Gaetan Duval: 3 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU + 0 PR ), 3.33 % MMP & HP: 2 Seat (0 FPTP + 2 RU + 0 PR), 2.22 % MMSM: 1 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU), 1.11 %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 15

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Labour PartyMMM Votes 1084236 1084236 PR Value 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,774.36 17,487.68 17,210.10 17,210.10 16,941.19 16,680.55

Labour PartyMMM Seats 60 60 60 60 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65

MSMMMR Votes 330219 330219 PR Value 22,014.60 20,638.69 19,424.65 18,345.50 17,379.95 17,379.95 17,379.95 16,510.95 16,510.95 16,510.95

MSMMMR Seats 0 14 15 16 17 18 18 18 19 19 19 19

Labour PartyMMM Seats % 100.00 75.00 74.07 73.17 72.29 71.43 71.76 72.09 71.26 71.59 71.91 72.22

Parti MSM- Gaetan MMR Duval 3 Seats % Seats % 0 0 17.50 3.75 18.52 19.51 20.48 21.43 21.18 20.93 21.84 21.59 21.35 21.11 3.70 3.66 3.61 3.57 3.53 3.49 3.45 3.41 3.37 3.33

MMP & HP 2 Seats MMSM 1 % Seat % 0 0 2.50 1.25 2.47 2.44 2.41 2.38 2.35 2.33 2.30 2.27 2.25 2.22 1.23 1.22 1.20 1.19 1.18 1.16 1.15 1.14 1.12 1.11

1995 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 LOSERS + 10 PR - Party's seats percentage


1.11 2.22 3.33 21.11

72.22

Labour Party-MMM Seats % MMP & HP Seats %

MSM-MMR Seats % MMSM Seats %

Parti Gaetan Duval Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 16

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Labour 1995 PartyElections MMM Seats Votes % 60 65.17 80 65.17 81 65.17 82 65.17 83 65.17 84 65.17 85 65.17 86 65.17 87 65.17 88 65.17 89 65.17 90 65.17 91 65.17 92 65.17 93 65.17 94 65.17 95 65.17 96 65.17 97 65.17 98 65.17 99 65.17 100 65.17

MSMMMR Votes % 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85 19.85

Labour PartyMMM Seats % 100 75.00 74.07 73.17 72.29 71.43 71.76 72.09 71.26 71.59 71.91 72.22 71.43 71.74 72.04 72.34 71.58 71.88 72.16 72.45 72.73 72.00

MSMMMR Seats % 0 17.50 18.52 19.51 20.48 21.43 21.18 20.93 21.84 21.59 21.35 21.11 21.98 21.74 21.51 21.28 22.11 21.88 21.65 21.43 21.21 22.00

Parti Gaetan MMP & Duval HP MMSM Deviation Seats % Seats % Seats % % 0 0 0 54.68 3.75 2.50 1.25 12.18 3.70 2.47 1.23 10.24 3.66 2.44 1.22 8.34 3.61 2.41 1.20 6.49 3.57 2.38 1.19 4.68 3.53 2.35 1.18 5.27 3.49 2.33 1.16 5.84 3.45 2.30 1.15 4.11 3.41 2.27 1.14 4.68 3.37 2.25 1.12 5.24 3.33 2.22 1.11 5.79 3.30 2.20 1.10 4.13 3.26 2.17 1.09 4.68 3.23 2.15 1.08 5.22 3.19 2.13 1.06 5.74 3.16 2.11 1.05 4.15 3.13 2.08 1.04 4.68 3.09 2.06 1.03 5.20 3.06 2.04 1.02 5.70 3.03 2.02 1.01 6.20 3.00 2.00 1.00 4.68

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 17

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

1995 Elections Simulation


120 100

Pourcentage

80 60 40 20 0 60 FPTP

60 FPTP + 10 PR

60 FPTP + 20 PR Seats

60 FPTP + 20 Losers

60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR

60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR

Labour Party-MMM Votes % MSM-MMR Seats % MMSM Seats %

MSM-MMR Votes % Parti Gaetan Duval Seats %

Labour Party-MMM Seats % MMP & HP Seats %

1995 ELECTIONS in % Labour PartyMMM Votes % 65.17 65.17 65.17 MSMMMR Votes % 19.85 19.85 19.85 Labour PartyMMM Seats % 100.00 85.71 77.50 MSMMMR Seats % 0 14.29 22.50 Parti Gaetan Duval Seats % 0 0 0 MMP & HP Seats % 0 0 0

Seats 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR

MMSM Seats % 0 0 0

Deviation 54.68 26.10 9.68

65.17

19.85

75.00

17.50

3.75

2.50

1.25

12.18

65.17

19.85

72.22

21.11

3.33

2.22

1.11

5.79

65.17

19.85

72.00

22.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

4.68

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 18

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2000 Elections In 2000, the MMM-MSM alliance received 951643 votes representing 51.70 percent of votes whereas the Labour Party-PMXD alliance received 673145 votes representing 36.57 percent of total votes. In terms of seats, the MMM-MSM alliance received 54 seats representing 90 percent of seats whereas the Labour Party-PMXD alliance received 6 seat representing 10 percent of total seats.

2000 Elections - Party's votes percentage

Labour PartyPMXD Votes%, 36.57

MSM-MMM Votes% , 51.70

MSM-MMM Votes%

Labour Party- PMXD

Votes%

2000 Elections - 60 FPTP - Party's Seats Percentage

10%

0%

90%

MSM-MMM Seats%

Labour Party- PMXD

Seats%

MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 19

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

In 2000, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats under PR, the situation would be as follows: MMM-MSM: 54 Seats (54 FPTP + 0 PR), 67.50 % Labour Party-PMXD: 26 Seats (6 FPTP + 20 PR), 32.50 % MDN Raj Dayal: 0 Seats (0 FPTP + 0 PR), 0 % 2000 Elections MSMMMM Votes 951643 51.70 58.57 PR Value 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 17,302.60 MSMMMM Seats 54 Labour PartyPMXD Votes 673145 36.57 41.43 PR Value 96,163.57 84,143.13 74,793.89 67,314.50 61,195.00 56,095.42 51,780.38 48,081.79 44,876.33 42,071.56 39,596.76 37,396.94 35,428.68 33,657.25 32,054.52 30,597.50 29,267.17 28,047.71 26,925.80 25,890.19 Labour PartyPMXD Seats 6 MSMMMM Seats % 90.00 Labour PartyPMXD Seats% 10.00

Vote % Relative% Add. Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

88.52 87.10 85.71 84.38 83.08 81.82 80.60 79.41 78.26 77.14 76.06 75.00 73.97 72.97 72.00 71.05 70.13 69.23 68.35 67.50

11.48 12.90 14.29 15.63 16.92 18.18 19.40 20.59 21.74 22.86 23.94 25.00 26.03 27.03 28.00 28.95 29.87 30.77 31.65 32.50

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 20

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2000 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 PR

Labour PartyPMXD Seats%, 32.50 MSM-MMM Seats% , 67.50

MSM-MMM Seats%

Labour Party- PMXD

Seats%

In the same elections, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System, the situation would have been as follows: MMM-MSM: 57 Seats (60 FPTP + 0 RU), 71.25 % Labour Party-PMXD: 22 Seats (0 FPTP + 19 RU), 27.50 % MDN Raj Dayal: 1 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU), 1.25 %

2000 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 Losers - Party's seat percentage


MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat %, 1.25 Labour PartyPMXD Seats%, 27.50 MSM-MMM Seats% , 71.25

MSM-MMM Seats%

Labour Party- PMXD

Seats%

MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 21

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

In 2000, in a configuration of a total of 90 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post, 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System and 10 seats under PR , the situation would be as follows: MMM-MSM: 57 Seats (60 FPTP + 0 RU + 0 PR), 63.33 % Labour Party-PMXD: 32 Seats (0 FPTP + 19 RU+ 10 PR), 35.56 % MDN Raj Dayal: 1 Seat (0 FPTP + 1 RU + 0 PR), 1.11 % 2000 Elections MSMMMM Votes 951643 951643 51.70 58.57 PR Value 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 16,407.64 MSMMMM Seats 54 57 Labour PartyPMXD Votes 673145 673145 36.57 41.43 PR Value 29,267.17 28,047.71 26,925.80 25,890.19 24,931.30 24,040.89 23,211.90 22,438.17 21,714.35 21,035.78 Labour PartyPMXD Seats 6 22 MSMMMM Seats % 90.00 71.25 Labour PartyPMXD Seats% 10.00 27.50

+ 20 Losers Vote % Relative% Add. Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

70.37 69.51 68.67 67.86 67.06 66.28 65.52 64.77 64.04 63.33

28.40 29.27 30.12 30.95 31.76 32.56 33.33 34.09 34.83 35.56

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 22

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2000 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR - Party's Seats Percentage


MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat %, 1.11 Labour PartyPMXD Seats%, 35.56 MSM-MMM Seats% , 63.33

MSM-MMM Seats%

Labour Party- PMXD

Seats%

MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat %

Seats 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR

MSMMMM Votes% 51.70 51.70 51.70

2000 ELECTIONS in % Labour Labour PartyMSMPartyPMXD MMM PMXD Votes% Seats% Seats% 36.57 90.00 10 36.57 36.57 77.14 67.50 22.86 32.50

MDN Raj Dayal 1 Seat % Deviation 0 64.87 0 0 39.15 19.87

51.70

36.57

71.25

27.50

1.25

28.62

51.70

36.57

63.33

35.56

1.11

12.65

51.70

36.57

58.00

41.00

1.00

1.87

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 23

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2005 ELECTIONS In 2005, the Labour-PMXD alliance received 948,766 votes representing 48.80 percent of total votes whereas the MMM-MSM PMSD alliance received 829,460 votes representing 42.60 percent of total votes. In terms of seats, the Labour-PMXD alliance received 38 seats representing 63.33 percent of seats whereas the MMM-MSM PMSD alliance received 22 seat representing 36.67 percent of total seats.

2005 Elections - Party's Votes Percentage

MMM - MSM PMSD Votes, 42.60

Labour-PMXD Votes , 48.80

Labour-PMXD Votes

MMM - MSM PMSD

Votes

2005 Elections - 60 FPTP - Party's Seat Percenatge

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %, 36.67 Labour-PMXD Seats % , 63.33

Labour-PMXD Seats %

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 24

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

In 2005, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats under PR, the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-PMXD: 43 Seats (38 FPTP + 5 PR), 53.75 % MMM-MSM-PMSD: 37 Seats (22 FPTP + 15 PR), 46.25 %

2005 Elections LabourPMXD Votes 948,766 48.80 53.39 PR Value 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 24,327.33 23,719.15 23,140.63 23,140.63 22,589.67 22,589.67 22,064.33 22,064.33 LabourPMXD Seats 38 MMM MSM PMSD Votes 829,460 42.60 46.61 PR Value 36,063.48 34,560.83 33,178.40 31,902.31 30,720.74 29,623.57 28,602.07 27,648.67 26,756.77 25,920.63 25,135.15 24,395.88 23,698.86 23,698.86 23,698.86 23,040.56 23,040.56 22,417.84 22,417.84 21,827.89 MMM - MSM PMSD Seats 22 LabourPMXD Seats% 63.33 MMM MSM PMSD Seats% 36.67

Vote % Relative % Additional Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 39 40 40 41 41 42 42 43

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 34 34 35 35 36 36 37 37

62.30 61.29 60.32 59.38 58.46 57.58 56.72 55.88 55.07 54.29 53.52 52.78 53.42 54.05 53.33 53.95 53.25 53.85 53.16 53.75

37.70 38.71 39.68 40.63 41.54 42.42 43.28 44.12 44.93 45.71 46.48 47.22 46.58 45.95 46.67 46.05 46.75 46.15 46.84 46.25

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 25

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2005 Eletions - 60 FPTP + 20 PR - Party's Seat Percentage

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %, 46.25

Labour-PMXD Seats % , 53.75

Labour-PMXD Seats %

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %

In the same elections, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System, the situation would have been as follows: Labour Party-PMXD: 45 Seats (38 FPTP + 7 RU), 56.25 % MMM-MSM-PMSD: 35 Seats (22 FPTP + 13 RU), 43.75 %

2005 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 Losers

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %, 43.75

Labour-PMXD Seats % , 56.25

Labour-PMXD Seats %

MMM - MSM PMSD Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 26

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

For a configuration of a total of 90 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post, 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System and 10 seats under PR , the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-PMXD: 48 Seats (38 FPTP + 7 RU + 3 PR), 53.33 % MMM-MSM-PMSD: 42 Seats (22 FPTP + 13 PR + 7 PR), 46.67 %

+ 20 Losers Vote % Relative % Additional Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

LabourPMXD Votes 948,766 948,766 48.80 53.39 PR Value 20,625.35 20,625.35 20,625.35 20,625.35 20,625.35 20,625.35 20,186.51 20,186.51 19,765.96 19,362.57

2005 Elections MMM LabourMSM PMXD PMSD Seats Votes 38 829,460 45 829,460 42.60 46.61 PR Value 23,040.56 22,417.84 21,827.89 21,268.21 20,736.50 20,230.73 20,230.73 19,749.05 19,749.05 19,749.05

MMM MSM PMSD Seats 22 35

LabourPMXD Seats% 63.33 56.25

MMM MSM PMSD Seats% 36.67 43.75

45 45 45 45 45 46 46 47 48 48

36 37 38 39 40 40 41 41 41 42

55.56 54.88 54.22 53.57 52.94 53.49 52.87 53.41 53.93 53.33

44.44 45.12 45.78 46.43 47.06 46.51 47.13 46.59 46.07 46.67

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 27

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2005 Elections PR Simulation


70 60
Pourcentage

50 40 30 20 10 0 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR Seats Labour-PMXD Votes % Labour-PMXD Seats % MMM - MSM PMSD Votes % MMM - MSM PMSD Seats % 60 FPTP + 60 FPTP + 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 20 Losers + 20 Losers + 10 PR 20 PR

Seats 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR

LabourPMXD Votes % 48.80 48.80 48.80

2005 ELECTIONS in % MMM MSM LabourPMSD PMXD Votes % Seats % 42.60 63.33 42.60 42.60 54.29 53.75

MMM MSM PMSD Seats % 36.67 45.71 46.25

Deviation 20.46 2.38 1.30

48.80

42.60

56.25

43.75

6.30

48.80

42.60

53.33

46.67

0.47

48.80

42.60

53.00

47.00

-0.20

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 28

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2010 ELECTIONS In 2010, the Labour Party-MSM- PMSD alliance received 1,001,903 votes representing 49.69 percent of total votes whereas the MMM-UN-MMSD alliance received 847,095 votes representing 42.01 percent of total votes. In terms of seats, the Labour Party-MSM- PMSD alliance received 41 seats representing 68.33 percent of seats whereas the MSM-MMR alliance received 18 seats representing 30 percent of total seats. The FSN scored 51161 votes with a percentage of 2.54 of the total votes. In terms of seats, the FSN got one seat with a percentage of 1.67 out of total seats

2010 Elections - Party votes percentage

FSN Votes %, 2.54 MMM-UN-MMSD Votes % , 42.01

Labour Party-MSMPMSD Votes %, 49.69

MMM-UN-MMSD Votes %

Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Votes %

FSN Votes %

2010 Elections - 60 FPTP - Party's percentage

FSN Seats %, 1.67

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %, 30.00

Labour Party-MSMPMSD Seats %, 68.33

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %

Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats %

FSN Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 29

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

In 2010, for a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under PR, the situation would have been as follows: Labour Party-MSM-PMSD: 43 Seats (41 FPTP + 2 PR), 53.75 % MSM-MMR: 36 Seats (18 FPTP + 18 PR), 45.00 % FSN: 1 Seat (1 FPTP + 0 PR), 1.25 % MMMUNMMSD Votes 847,095 42.01 45.81 PR Value 44,583.95 42,354.75 40,337.86 38,504.32 36,830.22 35,295.63 33,883.80 32,580.58 31,373.89 30,253.39 29,210.17 28,236.50 27,325.65 26,471.72 25,669.55 24,914.56 24,202.71 23,530.42 23,530.42 22,894.46 MMMUNMMSD Seats 18 LabourMSMPMSD Votes 1,001,903 49.69 54.19 PR Value 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,854.83 23,300.07 23,300.07 LabourMSMPMSD Seats 41 MMMUNMMSD SEATS% 30.00 LabourMSM PMSD SEATS % 68.33

Vote % Relative % Add. Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 35 36 36

41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 42 42 43

31.15 32.26 33.33 34.38 35.38 36.36 37.31 38.24 39.13 40.00 40.85 41.67 42.47 43.24 44.00 44.74 45.45 44.87 45.57 45.00

67.21 66.13 65.08 64.06 63.08 62.12 61.19 60.29 59.42 58.57 57.75 56.94 56.16 55.41 54.67 53.95 53.25 53.85 53.16 53.75

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 30

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2010 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 PR - Party's seat percentage

FSN Seats %, 1.25

Labour Party-MSMPMSD Seats %, 53.75

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %, 45.00

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %

Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats %

FSN Seats %

In the same elections, in a configuration of a total of 80 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post and 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System, the situation would have been as follows: Labour Party-MSM-PMSD: 47 Seats (41 FPTP + 6 RU), 58.75 % MSM-MMR: 32 Seats (18 FPTP + 14 RU), 40.00 % FSN: 1 Seat (1 FPTP + 0 PR), 1.25 %

2010 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 LOSERS - Party's seat percentage

FSN Seats % 1.25 MMM-UN-MMSD Seats % 40.00 Labour Party-MSMPMSD Seats % 58.75

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %

Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats %

FSN Seats %

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 31

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

For a configuration of a total of 90 seats in parliament, comprising of 60 seats at First Past The Post, 20 seats allocated under the new Loser System and 10 seats under PR , the situation would be as follows: Labour Party-MSM-PMSD: 48 Seats (41 FPTP + 6 RU + 1 PR), 53.33 % MSM-MMR: 41 Seats (18 FPTP + 14 RU + 9 PR), 45.56 % FSN: 1 Seat (1 FPTP + 0 RU + 0 PR), 1.11 % MMMUNMMSD Seats 18 32 LabourMSMPMSD Votes 1,001,903 1,001,903 49.69 54.19 PR Value 23,854.83 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,872.98 20,447.00 LabourMSMPMSD Seats 41 47 FSN Sea t 1 1 MMMUNMMSD SEATS% 30.00 40.00 LabourMSM PMSD SEATS % 68.33 58.75

MMM-UNMMSD Votes 847,095 + 20 Losers Vote % Relative % Add. Seat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 847,095 42.01 45.81 PR Value 44,583.95 24,914.56 24,202.71 23,530.42 22,894.46 22,291.97 21,720.38 21,177.38 20,660.85 20,660.85

FSN Seats % 1.67 1.25

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 40 41

47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 48 48

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

40.74 41.46 42.17 42.86 43.53 44.19 44.83 45.45 44.94 45.56

58.02 57.32 56.63 55.95 55.29 54.65 54.02 53.41 53.93 53.33

1.23 1.22 1.20 1.19 1.18 1.16 1.15 1.14 1.12 1.11

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 32

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2010 Elections - 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR

FSN Seats %, 1.11

Labour Party-MSMPMSD Seats %, 53.33

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %, 45.56

MMM-UN-MMSD Seats %

Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats %

FSN Seats %

2010 ELECTIONS in % MMMUNMMSD Votes % 42.01 42.01 42.01 42.01 42.01 Labour PartyMSMPMSD Votes % 49.69 49.69 49.69 49.69 49.69 MMMUNMMSD Seats % 30.00 40.00 45.00 Labour PartyMSMPMSD Seats % 68.33 58.57 53.75

Seats 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 Losers + 20 PR

FSN Votes % 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54

FSN Seats % Deviation 1.67 31 1.43 1.25 11 1 -8 11

40.00

58.75

1.25

42.01

49.69

2.54

45.56

53.33

1.11

42.01

49.69

2.54

45.00

54.00

1.00

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 33

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

2010 Elections PR Simulation


80 70 60
Pourcentage

50 40 30 20 10 0 60 FPTP 60 FPTP + 10 PR 60 FPTP + 20 PR Seats MMM-UN-MMSD Votes % FSN Votes % Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats % Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Votes % MMM-UN-MMSD Seats % FSN Seats % 60 FPTP + 60 FPTP + 60 FPTP + 20 Losers 20 Losers + 20 Losers + 10 PR 20 PR

Conclusion We have seen as from above that the best combination for an effective representativity of the parties under the new electoral system has to be 60 elected through First Past The Post (FPTP) plus 20 candidates who have just come after the elected members in each constituency, i.e. they have ranked 4th position AND together with a combination of 10 candidates nominated under the PR through the party list system.

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 34

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Date Party/Alliance 1991 MSM-MMM-MTD Labour Party-PMSD 1995 Labour Party MMM MSM MMR Parti Gaetan Duval MMP & HP MMSM 2000 MMM MSM Labour Party PMXD MDN Raj Dayal 2005 Labour Party PMXD MMM MSM Labour Party MSM 2010 PMSD MMM-UNMMSD FSN

FPTP Seats 57 3 60 0 0 0 0 54 6 38 22 41 18 1

Proposed Seats under the reforms 60 30 65 19 3 2 1 57 32 1 48 42 48 41 1

FPTP Seats Date 1991 Party/Alliance MSM-MMM-MTD Labour PartyPMSD Labour Party MMM MSM MMR Parti Gaetan Duval MMP & HP MMSM MMM MSM Labour Party PMXD MDN Raj Dayal Labour Party PMXD MMM MSM Labour Party MSM - PMSD MMM-UNMMSD FSN Votes % 55.40 39.30 65.17 19.85 6.33 1.73 1.53 51.70 36.57 # 57 3 60 0 0 0 0 54 6 0 48.80 42,60 49.69 42.01 2.54 38 22 41 18 1 % 95.00 5.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90.00 10.00 0.00 63.33 36.67 68.33 30.00 1.67

FPTP + 20 PR Seats # 57 23 62 18 0 0 0 54 26 0 43 37 43 36 1 % 71.25 28.75 77.50 22.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.50 32.50 0.00 53.75 46.25 53.75 45.00 1.25

FPTP + 20 RU Seats # 60 20 60 14 3 2 1 57 22 1 45 35 47 32 1 % 75.00 25.00 75.00 17.50 3.75 2.50 1.25 71.25 27.50 1.25 56.25 43.75 58.75 40.00 1.25

FPTP + 20 RU + 10 PR Seats # 60 30 65 19 3 2 1 57 32 1 48 42 48 41 1 % 66.67 33.33 72.22 21.11 3.33 2.22 1.11 63.33 35.56 1.11 53.33 46.67 53.33 45.56 1.11

1995

2000

2005

2010

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 35

10/6/2012

Electoral Reforms and Representativity

Appendix: Through the document, RU is used to represent the RUNNER UP, i.e. the candidate ranked 4th in the elections. At times, it is referred as LOSER or elected under the New Loser System

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this document are those of the author (Dave Kissoondoyal) and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to the MMM

Dave Kissoondoyal

Page 36

10/6/2012