User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
→Possible anomalies: clearer wording
(→Marginal seats: and..) |
(→Possible anomalies: clearer wording) |
||
Line 195:
In 1994-5, Professor Anton Buhagiar suggested improvements to Malta's STV system to increase proportionality and eliminate "wrong-winner" elections. After considering various methods of first assigning seats to multi-member constituencies so that strict national proportionality was maintained, he leaned towards the use of a "Priority Queue". This is a rather complex and convoluted method, particularly in the UK with 650 seats to allocate (or rather about 40% of them), and Buhagiar conceded that anomalies will arise whichever method is chosen.<ref>{{cite web |first=Anton |last=Buhagiar |title=THE PRIORITY QUEUE: A FAIR METHOD FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF SEATS TO DISTRICTS.|url=https://www.um.edu.mt/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/207788/buhag2.pdf|date=June 8, 1995}}</ref>
Buhagiar describes the anomaly (if seats are assigned partywise,
''"The proposed order for the party scans in the partywise distribution was that determined by the size of the nationwide first count vote, as mentioned in iv) above. The largest party has all its seats assigned first to the districts, then the next largest, and so on, until finally one assigns the seats of the smallest party. By the time one reaches the scan for the smallest party, most of the district seats will have been already filled, with the result, say, that such a party will be awarded its seat in a district where it does not the have highest number or the highest district percentage of votes.
| |||