12 November 2020 02:28 am Views - 567
Despite reams and reams written about it, a Bill is yet to be drafted providing for a change in the system for the election of MPs
Based on our 2012 electoral committee interim report, a new Bill was drafted to change the electoral system for Local Authorities
The FPP system creates stable governments, but weakens the strength of the opposition by reducing its representation to drastic levels
When you increase the quota under PR in an MMPR system, it always leads to unstable governments
The committee has scheduled its next meeting for November 13. The outbreak of the pandemic and the partial lockdown of the country have become a handicap to its work, though.
The need for a change of the electoral system has been discussed and been in the public domain for nearly two decades, but it is yet to see the light of day. The 2002/2004 UNP Government led by Ranil Wickremesinghe appointed a Parliamentary Select Committee headed by Foreign Relations Minister Dinesh Gunawardane as a then MP of the opposition, setting in motion the process. The introduction of a mix of the present Proportional Representation (PR) and the First Past the Post (FPP) system has been proposed as a viable alternative ever since. Despite reams and reams written about it, a Bill is yet to be drafted providing for a change in the system for the election of MPs, and one is worried whether the resources and time spent in this regard has been a sheer waste.
Senior Prof. Sudantha Liyanage who is presently the Vice Chancellor of Sri Jayewardenepura University and an expert on electoral reforms has contributed to various committees under successive governments to evolve a methodology for the election of MPs to Parliament, the Local Authorities and Provincial Councils.
Sharing his views and wide experience in this regard, Prof. Liyanage said that the Dinesh Gunawardane committee was appointed by then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesimghe in 2003. “That is the beginning of the entire story. Actually speaking, there is not much discussion on this today. Though the Government proposed the 20th Amendment, it did not discuss electoral reforms. When the 19th Amendment was presented to Parliament in 2015, the then Government promised that the 20th Amendment providing for the new electoral system would be brought in soon. This did not materialise ever since due to some reasons. Now, there are so many things being discussed here and there,” he said.
In the evolution of a new criterion for the election of MPs, one area of discussion is the cutoff point. Currently, a political party or an independent group has to secure a minimum of more than 5% of total votes polled to be considered for parliamentary representation. Prof. Liyanage said that the cutoff point remained at 12.5% in terms of the 1978 constitution, but it was reduced to 5% under the 15th Amendment to the Constitution enabling smaller parties, including ones representing minority communities, to gain representation in the House. “Now some people think whether it should be increased to 7.5 or 8%,” he said.
The 5% cutoff point really placed the two main political parties, or forces, in a disadvantageous position as Prof. Liyanage said. “The major damage was done to the two main parties. When the small parties feel confident they can secure a few seats by contesting alone without being aligned to any main party. Once they do it, they have a better say in a coalition Government. Based on our 2012 electoral committee interim report, a new Bill was drafted to change the electoral system for Local Authorities. In 2015/2016, it was drastically changed due to pressure from smaller parties. That is why the election was conducted under the Mixed-Member Proportional Representation system (MMPR). But it was a failure,” he said.
He said it led some people to conclude that even the MMPR system was ill-advised for Sri Lanka. “According to my understanding, MMPR is something people are demanding. There is one big disadvantage with the present PR system; that is that a contestant has one whole big area to cover at an election for votes. It is one big district. I think people are looking for electoral MPs. The FPP system is basically based on electorates. But it has another disadvantage. It does not ensure any representation for the losing party. Less than 50% of people vote for the losing party. Still, a lot of countries—the UK, India and Pakistan—practise this system. They are not worried about the vote percentage received by the loser,” he said.
Commenting on the merits of the FPP system further, he said it always makes way for stable governments to be formed. He said the PR system always leads to unstable governments.
The FPP system creates stable governments, but weakens the strength of the opposition by reducing its representation to drastic levels. Prof. Liyanage said that he personally advocates the MMPR system, which is mix of both as a result. At the moment there are 225 seats in the House. He said 150 of them should be elected on the basis of electorates, and the rest under PR. For that purpose, he said that the country should be delimitated into 150 electorates. “Then it leads to simple majority governments. At the same time the opposition also has some strength in the House. That is the best system we can implement. In this instance, 75 seats reserved under the quota of PR are to be nominated by the respective parties. Today, the parties nominate 29 MPs on the National List. Then, there are problems. That is the only weakness. But we came out with a criterion on the nomination of members under the PR system,” he said.
No matter what, he said it was high time to do away with preferential voting.
In the midst of efforts underway for a new constitution, Prof. Liyanage said almost all the parties representing parliament are happy with the MMPR system. Asserting that a new electoral system is a must, he said there are numerous models of MMPR system, but a Sri Lankan model should
be found.
When you increase the quota under PR in an MMPR system, it always leads to unstable governments. He said 225 seats in the House as in today’s context would suffice for the country, but a new argument had been brought out otherwise.
“The present number of seats was determined under the 1978 Constitution. That was implemented in 1989. It means 30 years have lapsed. Since then, our population has grown. If there is a need, the number can be increased. But, I don’t think it should be increased. When we delimitate electorates, the biggest is compartmentalization. Here, the minority groups and religious groups ask for separate electorates. If you increase the quota under the FPP system, this problem can be addressed,” he said. However, he said 150 would be the ideal number under the FPP system. “It ensures an MP for every 100,000 voters,” he said.