-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
1/13
The Best Loser System and Proportional Representation By Dave Kissoondoyal
60
0
54
6
38
22
41
18
2
18
0
20
5
15
2
18
9
21
0
30
10
20
7
23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Labour Party
MMM
MSM MMR MMM MSM Labour Party
PMXD
Labour Party
PMXD
MMM MSM Labour Party
MSM - PMSD
MMM-UNMMSD
1995 2000 2005 2010
Constituency PR 20 Seats PR 30 Seats
The Best Loser System (BLS) does not have its raison-dtre in a new electoral system as
formulated by the Sachs Commission.
The implementation of the Sachs recommendations requires the insertion, in our electoral
system, of a dose of proportional representation based on a party-list vote. This means that, in
addition to voting for the three candidates of his choice to represent him in Parliament, the
elector shall also vote for a party of his choice. And in voting for that party, he will be voting for
members of that party whose names appear on the party-list.
At paragraph 84, in its report, the Sachs Commission refers to this system as Model C ,
The third proposal, which we refer to as PR Model C, would allow for a greater degree of fairness
whilst still heavily favoring stability. This model would lean in favor of stability by ensuring that
the number of PR seats was limited to a figure not exceeding 30. Whether or not the BLS is
retained, the fact that there will be sixty-two members elected on a constituency basis and only a
maximum of thirty elected according to the compensatory PR system, will load the House heavily
on the side of the constituency form of representation. The exaggerated strength of the leading
party produced by the FPTP will further emphasise the relative strength in the House of such
party.
Thus, any party or alliance which gets close to 50% or more of the votes will be assured of such a
substantial number of constituency seats that its right to form a government could not be
threatened by the introduction of thirty PR seats. In the elections of 2000, the MSM/MMM
alliance got 58 out of 70 seats.
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
2/13
If, the PR Model C had been applied and the additional number of PR seats was 20, the alliance
would have ended up with a majority that could still have been more than 70%. If 30 PR seats had
been added, it would have ended up with a majority of nearly 60%. Thus, while strongly geared
towards protecting the right to form a government of the leader of a party that on its own gets
close to 50% of the national vote, or a pre-election alliance that leads with even a low percentage,
it would introduce a relatively significant correction to the present gross under-representation of
the opposition party or parties. It should be noted, however, that even if PR Model C would not
put at risk a party or alliance that received nearly half the votes cast, it could make a difference if
no single party or alliance received close to 50% or more of the votes. In such narrow
circumstances, it could, if three parties each got more than 10% of the vote, place the third party
in a position to form a postelectoral alliance with a second party so as to form a majority in the
House and thereby choose the Prime Minister. At this stage, one can only speculate on how any
system of PR would affect electoral and party behaviour. The practical effect of PR Model C might
well be to encourage the creation of postelection coalitions rather than pre-election alliances. At
the moment, the electoral system gives enormous, and many say, disproportionate, incentives to
form pre-election alliances. Some voters might see this as having the advantage of establishing a
balanced ticket known to the electorate in advance. The parties and the electorate generally,however, might prefer the extra degree of fluidity and voter-choice which PR Model C would
introduce.
After discussions among all the political parties in Mauritius, consensus has been reached as
follows:
1. Parties which reach the threshold of 7.5 % are going to be considered for the Proportional
Representation
2. The number of PR seats as per the party-list would be 20.
We are now going to apply the above in simulation to the past elections as from 1995 to 2010.
Let us take the example of the elections of 20th
December 1995 when the MMM Party had allied
with the Labour Party and we got the second 60-0 of this country.
The Labour Party MMM alliance obtained 1,084,236 votes, representing 65.17 percent
and secured 60 seats
The MSM-MMR alliance obtained 330,219 votes, representing 19.85 % and secured NO seat
at the assembly
The Gaetan Duval Party obtained 105,282 votes, representing 6.33 % and managed to get
one seat as Best Loser
The MMP/Hizbullah Party Alliance obtained only 3005 votes, representing 1.8 % and
managed to get one seat as Best Loser
Two other best loser seats, out of four, were secured by the Rodrigues Movement.
None of the BLS seats will be considered since the effects of the BLS will be already included in
the PR.
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
3/13
1995 ELECTIONS
Labour
Party-
MMM
Votes
Labour
Party-
MMM
Seats
MSM-
MMR
Votes
MSM-
MMR
Seats
Labour
Party-
MMM
Seats %
MSM-
MMR
Seats %
1084236 60 330219 0 100.00 0.00
Vote % 65.17 19.85
Relative % 76.65 23.35
Additional
Seat PR Value PR Value
1 17,774.36 60 330,219.00 1 98.36 1.64
2 17,774.36 60 165,109.50 2 96.77 3.23
3 17,774.36 60 110,073.00 3 95.24 4.76
4 17,774.36 60 82,554.75 4 93.75 6.25
5 17,774.36 60 66,043.80 5 92.31 7.69
6 17,774.36 60 55,036.50 6 90.91 9.097 17,774.36 60 47,174.14 7 89.55 10.45
8 17,774.36 60 41,277.38 8 88.24 11.76
9 17,774.36 60 36,691.00 9 86.96 13.04
10 17,774.36 60 33,021.90 10 85.71 14.29
11 17,774.36 60 30,019.91 11 84.51 15.49
12 17,774.36 60 27,518.25 12 83.33 16.67
13 17,774.36 60 25,401.46 13 82.19 17.81
14 17,774.36 60 23,587.07 14 81.08 18.92
15 17,774.36 60 22,014.60 15 80.00 20.00
16 17,774.36 60 20,638.69 16 78.95 21.05
17 17,774.36 60 19,424.65 17 77.92 22.0818 17,774.36 60 18,345.50 18 76.92 23.08
19 17,774.36 61 17,379.95 18 77.22 22.78
20 17,487.68 62 17,379.95 18 77.50 22.50
21 17,210.10 62 17,379.95 19 76.54 23.46
22 17,210.10 63 16,510.95 19 76.83 23.17
23 16,941.19 64 16,510.95 19 77.11 22.89
24 16,680.55 65 16,510.95 19 77.38 22.62
25 16,427.82 65 16,510.95 20 76.47 23.53
26 16,427.82 66 15,724.71 20 76.74 23.26
27 16,182.63 67 15,724.71 20 77.01 22.99
28 15,944.65 68 15,724.71 20 77.27 22.73
29 15,713.57 68 15,724.71 21 76.40 23.60
30 15,713.57 69 15,009.95 21 76.67 23.33
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
4/13
We would apply the formula from the recommendations of the Sachs Commission.
We are discarding from consideration all parties who have polled less than 7.5% of the total
votes cast
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 ofparties, 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
In the above table, the Party-list has been extended to 30 to allow a comparison in each election.
Therefore after the exercise of the additional seat allocation through PR, the setup post 1995General Elections would have been as follows:
Labour Party MMM = 62 Seats
MSM MMR = 18 Seats
Rodrigues People's Organisation = 2 seats
Total = 82 seats
SeatsParty Votes %
Constituency PR Total
Labour Party-MMM 1,084,236 65.17 60 2 62MSM-MMR 330,219 19.85 0 18 18
Gatan Duval Party 105,282 6.33 0 0
MMP-HP 28,749 1.73 0 0
Mauritian Militant Socialist
Movement 25,472 1.53 0 0
Rodrigues People's 16,631 1.00 2 2
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
5/13
Organisation
Rodrigues Movement 9,529 0.57 0 0
Muslim People's Front 8,233 0.49 0 0
Liberal Democrats' Movement 6,848 0.41 0 0
Natural Law Party 4,074 0.24 0 0
Liberal Action Party 3,332 0.20 0 0
Mauritian People's Party 2,505 0.15 0 0
Mauritian Movement for
Peace 1,630 0.10 0 0
Hizbullah 1,375 0.08 0 0
Movement for Justice 1,149 0.07 0 0
Mauritian Democratic
Movement 859 0.05 0 0
Socialist Movement of the
South 342 0.02 0 0
Hindu Etka Andolan Dul 307 0.02 0 0Republican Movement 281 0.02 0 0
Mauritian Democracy 259 0.02 0 0
Mauritian Workers'
Movement 212 0.01 0 0
Mauritius United Party 185 0.01 0 0
Mauritius Party Rights 100 0.01 0 0
Independents 32,007 1.92 0 0
Invalid/blank votes 8,805 - - -
Total valid votes 1,663,816
Total Voters 567,810 100.00 62 20 82
For a PR of 20 seats, 1995 elections
Labour Party MMM = 2 Seats from Party-List
MSM MMR = 18 Seats from Party-list
For a PR of 30 seats, 1995 elections
Labour Party MMM = 9 Seats from Party-List
MSM MMR = 21 Seats from Party-list
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
6/13
1995 Elections PR Results simulation
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Number of seats
Pourcentage
Labour Party-MMM Votes Labour Party-MMM Seats MSM-MMR Votes MSM-MMR Seats
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 percentof seats whereas the Labour Party-PMXD alliance received 6 seat representing 10 percent of total
seats.
2000 Elections
MSM-
MMM
Votes
MSM-
MM
M
Seats
Labour
Party-
PMXD
Votes
Labour
Party-
PMXD
Seats
MSM-
MM
M
Seats
%
Labour
Party-
PMXD
Seats%
951643 54 673145 6 90.00 10.00Vote % 51.70 36.57
Relative% 58.57 41.43
Add. Seat PR Value PR Value
1 17,302.60 54 96,163.57 7 88.52 11.48
2 17,302.60 54 84,143.13 8 87.10 12.90
3 17,302.60 54 74,793.89 9 85.71 14.29
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
7/13
4 17,302.60 54 67,314.50 10 84.38 15.63
5 17,302.60 54 61,195.00 11 83.08 16.92
6 17,302.60 54 56,095.42 12 81.82 18.18
7 17,302.60 54 51,780.38 13 80.60 19.40
8 17,302.60 54 48,081.79 14 79.41 20.59
9 17,302.60 54 44,876.33 15 78.26 21.74
10 17,302.60 54 42,071.56 16 77.14 22.86
11 17,302.60 54 39,596.76 17 76.06 23.94
12 17,302.60 54 37,396.94 18 75.00 25.00
13 17,302.60 54 35,428.68 19 73.97 26.03
14 17,302.60 54 33,657.25 20 72.97 27.03
15 17,302.60 54 32,054.52 21 72.00 28.00
16 17,302.60 54 30,597.50 22 71.05 28.95
17 17,302.60 54 29,267.17 23 70.13 29.87
18 17,302.60 54 28,047.71 24 69.23 30.77
19 17,302.60 54 26,925.80 25 68.35 31.6520 17,302.60 54 25,890.19 26 67.50 32.50
21 17,302.60 54 24,931.30 27 66.67 33.33
22 17,302.60 54 24,040.89 28 65.85 34.15
23 17,302.60 54 23,211.90 29 65.06 34.94
24 17,302.60 54 22,438.17 30 64.29 35.71
25 17,302.60 54 21,714.35 31 63.53 36.47
26 17,302.60 54 21,035.78 32 62.79 37.21
27 17,302.60 54 20,398.33 33 62.07 37.93
28 17,302.60 54 19,798.38 34 61.36 38.64
29 17,302.60 54 19,232.71 35 60.67 39.33
30 17,302.60 54 18,698.47 36 60.00 40.00
For a PR of 20 seats, 2000 elections
MMM MSM = 0 Seats from Party-List
Labour Party PMXD = 20 Seats from Party-list
For a PR of 30 seats, 2000 elections
MMM MSM = 0 Seats from Party-List
Labour Party PMXD = 30 Seats from Party-list
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
8/13
2000 Election PR Results Simulation
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Number of Seats
Pourcentage
MSM-MMM Votes% MSM-MMM Seats% Labour Party- PMXD Votes% Labour Party- PMXD Seats%
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 42.8560
percent of total votes. In terms of seats, the Labour-PMXD alliance received 38 seats representing63.33 percent of seats whereas the MMM-MSM PMSD alliance received 22 seat representing
36.67 percent of total seats.
2005 Elections
Labour-
PMXD
Votes
Labour-
PMXD
Seats
MMM -
MSM
PMSD
Votes
MMM
-
MSM
PMSD
Seats
Labour-
PMXD
Seats%
MMM -
MSM
PMSD
Seats%
948,766 38 829,460 22 63.33 36.67
Vote % 48.80 42.60Relative % 53.39 46.61
Additional
Seat PR Value PR Value
1 24,327.33 38 36,063.48 23 62.30 37.70
2 24,327.33 38 34,560.83 24 61.29 38.71
3 24,327.33 38 33,178.40 25 60.32 39.68
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
9/13
4 24,327.33 38 31,902.31 26 59.38 40.63
5 24,327.33 38 30,720.74 27 58.46 41.54
6 24,327.33 38 29,623.57 28 57.58 42.42
7 24,327.33 38 28,602.07 29 56.72 43.28
8 24,327.33 38 27,648.67 30 55.88 44.12
9 24,327.33 38 26,756.77 31 55.07 44.93
10 24,327.33 38 25,920.63 32 54.29 45.71
11 24,327.33 38 25,135.15 33 53.52 46.48
12 24,327.33 38 24,395.88 34 52.78 47.22
13 24,327.33 39 23,698.86 34 53.42 46.58
14 23,719.15 40 23,698.86 34 54.05 45.95
15 23,140.63 40 23,698.86 35 53.33 46.67
16 23,140.63 41 23,040.56 35 53.95 46.05
17 22,589.67 41 23,040.56 36 53.25 46.75
18 22,589.67 42 22,417.84 36 53.85 46.15
19 22,064.33 42 22,417.84 37 53.16 46.8420 22,064.33 43 21,827.89 37 53.75 46.25
21 21,562.86 43 21,827.89 38 53.09 46.91
22 21,562.86 44 21,268.21 38 53.66 46.34
23 21,083.69 44 21,268.21 39 53.01 46.99
24 21,083.69 45 20,736.50 39 53.57 46.43
25 20,625.35 45 20,736.50 40 52.94 47.06
26 20,625.35 46 20,230.73 40 53.49 46.51
27 20,186.51 46 20,230.73 41 52.87 47.13
28 20,186.51 47 19,749.05 41 53.41 46.59
29 19,765.96 48 19,749.05 41 53.93 46.07
30 19,362.57 48 19,749.05 42 53.33 46.67
For a PR of 20 seats, 2005 elections
Labour Party PMXD = 5 Seats from Party-List
MMM MSM = 15 Seats from Party-list
For a PR of 30 seats, 2005 elections
Labour Party PMXD = 10 Seats from Party-List
MMM MSM = 20 Seats from Party-list
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
10/13
2005 Elections PR Results simulation
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Number of Seats
Pourcentage
Labour-PMXD Votes Labour-PMXD Seats MMM - MSM PMSD Votes MMM - MSM PMSD Seats
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 41seats 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
MMM-
UN-
MMSD
Votes
MMM-
UN-
MMSD
Seats
Labour-
MSM-
PMSD
Votes
Labour-
MSM-
PMSD
Seats
MMM-
UN-
MMSD
SEATS
%
Labour-
MSM
PMSD
SEATS %
847,095 18 1,001,903 41 30.00 68.33Vote % 42.01 49.69
Relative
% 45.81 54.19
Add.
Seat PR Value PR Value
1 44,583.95 19 23,854.83 41 31.15 67.21
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
11/13
2 42,354.75 20 23,854.83 41 32.26 66.13
3 40,337.86 21 23,854.83 41 33.33 65.08
4 38,504.32 22 23,854.83 41 34.38 64.06
5 36,830.22 23 23,854.83 41 35.38 63.08
6 35,295.63 24 23,854.83 41 36.36 62.12
7 33,883.80 25 23,854.83 41 37.31 61.19
8 32,580.58 26 23,854.83 41 38.24 60.29
9 31,373.89 27 23,854.83 41 39.13 59.42
10 30,253.39 28 23,854.83 41 40.00 58.57
11 29,210.17 29 23,854.83 41 40.85 57.75
12 28,236.50 30 23,854.83 41 41.67 56.94
13 27,325.65 31 23,854.83 41 42.47 56.16
14 26,471.72 32 23,854.83 41 43.24 55.41
15 25,669.55 33 23,854.83 41 44.00 54.67
16 24,914.56 34 23,854.83 41 44.74 53.95
17 24,202.71 35 23,854.83 41 45.45 53.2518 23,530.42 35 23,854.83 42 44.87 53.85
19 23,530.42 36 23,300.07 42 45.57 53.16
20 22,894.46 36 23,300.07 43 45.00 53.75
21 22,894.46 37 22,770.52 43 45.68 53.09
22 22,291.97 37 22,770.52 44 45.12 53.66
23 22,291.97 38 22,264.51 44 45.78 53.01
24 21,720.38 38 22,264.51 45 45.24 53.57
25 21,720.38 38 21,780.50 46 44.71 54.12
26 21,720.38 39 21,317.09 46 45.35 53.49
27 21,177.38 39 21,317.09 47 44.83 54.02
28 21,177.38 40 20,872.98 47 45.45 53.4129 20,660.85 40 20,872.98 48 44.94 53.93
30 20,660.85 41 20,447.00 48 45.56 53.33
For a PR of 20 seats, 2010 elections
Labour Party MSM - PMSD = 2 Seats from Party-List
MMM-UNMMSD = 18 Seats from Party-list
For a PR of 30 seats, 2010 elections
Labour Party MSM - PMSD = 7 Seats from Party-List
MMM-UNMMSD = 23 Seats from Party-list
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
12/13
2010 Elections PR Results simulation
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Number of Seats
Pourcentage
MMM-UN-MMSD Votes MMM-UN-MMSD Seats Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Votes Labour Party-MSM- PMSD Seats
The Simulation exercise can be summarized in the table below:
Date Party/Alliance Constituency
PR 20
Seats
PR 30
Seats
Labour Party MMM 60 2 9
1995 MSM MMR 0 18 21
MMM MSM 54 0 0
2000 Labour Party PMXD 6 20 30
Labour Party PMXD 38 5 10
2005 MMM MSM 22 15 20
Labour Party MSM -
PMSD 41 2 7
2010 MMM-UNMMSD 18 18 23
-
7/31/2019 Best Loser System and Proportional Representation
13/13
In the simulation exercise above on the past elections, we have seen the following:
In 1995, the MSM-MMR alliance could have elected 18 or 21 PR seats under PR 20 or PR 30
respectively
In 2000, the Labour Party PMXD alliance could have elected 20 or 30 PR seats under PR 20
or PR 30 respectively
In 2005, the MMM MSM alliance could have elected 15 or 20 PR seats under PR 20 or PR
30 respectively
In 2010, the MMM-UNMMSD alliance could have elected 18 or 23 PR seats under PR 20 or
PR 30 respectively
Since the high number of candidates is elected through the party list under the PR representative,
the party or alliance just need to ensure that the list they submit to the Electoral Commissioner is
inclusive of all communities cared so far under the Best Loser System. A list of 30 members is
much safer in this purpose.
60
0
54
6
38
22
41
18
2
18
0
20
5
15
2
18
9
21
0
30
10
20
7
23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Labour Party
MMM
MSM MMR MMM MSM Labour Party
PMXD
Labour Party
PMXD
MMM MSM Labour Party
MSM - PMSD
MMM-UNMMSD
1995 2000 2005 2010
Constituency PR 20 Seats PR 30 Seats
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this document are those of the author (Dave Kissoondoyal) anddo not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to the MMM