Open List PR

            Currently, the possible electoral systems in question include Alternative Vote, Simple Transferable Vote, Closed List, and Open List Proportional Representation. Although every system attempts to guarantee the voter’s voice, open list PR is still the most proportional. By comparing open list PR with the other systems, one can see that it is proportional, preferential, and simple, and thus better suited to our conditions because we not only have a small parliament, but an electorate that should theoretically be as diverse as our class is in terms of political ideology.

            Beginning with the AV system, although it usually allows every voter to get what they want (although it may be a lesser preference – second, third, etc.), it removes the lowest vote-getters making the system less proportional. AV systems establish majority groups, but fail to represent minorities adequately. This is why open list PR is better than AV because although it may establish a majority, the system itself does not alienate minority interests. Similarly, closed list PR is not adequate because although it may be proportional, it too can remove choice because it doesn’t give the voter any preference in voting.

            In contrast STV, like open list PR, is one of the few systems that grants voter preference in elections because of its candidate-based nature. STV relies more heavily on candidates than does open list PR, because voters can select candidates across party lines, whereas in open list PR the voter ranks candidates within one party. Although these candidates still compete with each other within these parties, they are still promoting similar ideas parallel to the party’s interests. Although this is the same for STV, it is more difficult to do so because the voter can still pick from all of the candidates. Thus open list PR is provides preference while still exhibiting simplicity. Also, in terms of parliament size, it is known that increasing the number of seats increases proportionality. Since our parliament only has nine seats, it is beneficial to use a simple system that relies more on party ideals than on individuality, thus making it easier for the voter. By doing so, although one candidate may not make it into parliament, voters can still pick other candidates listed under the party and are theoretically be guaranteed to have their interests represented. This highlights another concern of STV regarding coalition formation before and after elections. As with our example, because there is no electoral accountability in terms of voter-candidate relations, those elected can form coalitions that do not coincide with electorate interests, and thus there is no check on those elected under the STV system. That is why open list PR would be the best option, because it is proportional, while ensuring representation of all interests through its simplicity in use of parties.