How the System Works

The Single Transferable Vote (STV) is a form of preferential voting in multi-member constituencies. Each constituency would elect between 3 and 5 MPs depending on its size. The Single Transferable Vote is so called because it is based on the principle that the elector has a first choice of representative, but if that preferred candidate has either so many votes that the individual's vote is not needed or has the least chance of being elected, then his or her vote is transferred pro rata to a second or subsequent choice.  The aim of the system is to give the voter the widest choice possible between candidates whilst eliminating, as far as possible, wasted votes (i.e. all votes which do not help to elect a candidate).

 Preferential voting means that instead of casting a single vote for a single candidate, a voter can express a list of preferences. Votes are cast by putting a '1' in the column next to the voter's preferred candidate, a '2' beside their second favorite candidate and so on until they no longer wish to express a preference.  Voters may vote for candidates within parties and across parties as well as for independents.

A quota is calculated which sets the number of votes a candidate must attain to be elected.  This is, simply, the total number of votes cast, divided by one more than the number of candidates to be elected, plus one vote.  By following this formula, no more than the required number of candidates can reach the quota.

Votes are counted according to the first preferences and any candidates who have achieved the quota are elected.

To decide which of the remaining candidates are elected the votes are transferred from candidates who have more than the necessary number to achieve the quota and from the candidate with the least number of votes.  This means that where the first preferences of the voters were not able to be used to elect a candidate, their second preferences come into play.  This process of transferring votes continues until the required numbers of candidates have attained enough votes to be elected.

For an illustration of an election using the Single Transferable Vote, click the link

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/votingsystems/stvmodel.htm

The system is used in the Australian Senate, the Republic of Ireland, Tasmania, Malta and Northern Ireland for local elections and elections to the European Parliament. It is also used for the indirect elections to the Rajya Sabha in  India.

Arguments used in favor

• STV provides a guarantee that everyone gets their views represented in parliament and that they have a say in what is done by their elected representatives.
• STV is the best option for putting the power in the hands of the voters.
• It keeps MPs linked to the people who voted for them. Most voters can identify a representative that they personally helped to elect and can feel affinity with. Such a personal link also increases accountability.
• In this system, parliament truly reflects the views of the voters.
• Only a party or coalition of parties, who could attract more than 50% of the electorate could form a government.. Parties will inevitably respond to this by developing policies to attract a wider cross-section of support, rather than being able to rely on narrow vote bank policies.
• There are no safe seats under STV, meaning candidates cannot be complacent and parties must campaign everywhere, and not just in marginal seats.
• When voters have the ability to rank candidates, the most disliked candidate cannot win, as they are no good at picking up second-, third- and lower-preference votes.
• STV offers voters a choice of representatives to approach with their concerns post-election, rather than just the one, who may not be at all sympathetic to a voter's views, or may even be the cause of the concern.
• It enables the voters to express opinions effectively. Voters can choose between candidates within parties, demonstrating support for different wings of the party. Voters can also express preferences between the abilities or other attributes, of individual candidates.
• It is simple for voters to use.
• There is no need for tactical voting. Voters can cast a positive vote and know that their vote will not be wasted whatever their choice is.
• Because constituencies are multi-member, the number of seats in each one can vary, depending on natural boundaries, so that the artificiality of carving segments out of a city, or tacking odd bits of countryside on to a town to make up the numbers, can be avoided
• It reflects proportionally the individual's voting intentions far better than any other system. Every vote has equal value and the number of 'wasted' votes, i.e. those which failed to elect any candidate of the voter's choice, is extremely small. Its ability to empower the voter is its greatest asset, and will reward the best in party politics as much as it will penalize the worst.
  

Weaknesses

• The system does not produce such accuracy in proportional representation of parties as the party list or additional member systems.
• Constituencies would be 3-5 times larger than they are now but with 3-5 MPs.
• There are critics who say that this system could lead to permanent coalition governments, but this would only happen if the voters as a whole want it.
• It is disliked by politicians, since it would remove power from them and give it to the electors, and many MPs with safe seats would lose the security they feel now.
  

For more information:
Telephone Us: 011-46081209, 011-64598338, 91-9891155057, 91-9868340420
Email Us: info@youthforequality.com