How to win using the LPV
The coming 2007 general election will be the first general election to use Limited Preferential Voting (LPV).
A number of by-elections have used LPV already.
Voters have three preferences to vote three candidates of their choice. The typical voter should give first preference (vote 1) to his/her favorite candidate. The second preference (vote 2) should be given to the second favorite candidate. The third preference (vote 3) should go to the third favorite candidate. This is easy to grasp.
What is not so easy to grasp is how a winner is determined under LPV. Candidates, political parties and voters must know how a candidate wins.
This article will explain how a winner is found under LPV. Before doing this, the basic reasons why LPV was introduced must be noted.
LPV was introduced to achieve two basic objectives. First, voters everywhere want government services brought to them. MP’s elected into Parliament under the first past the post system were concentrating their efforts on the parts of the electorates that voted them in.
This meant that, in some electorates where MP’’s were voted in by as small as 10% of the electorate vote under first past the post, services were restricted to those small parts of the electorates. Further, under first past the post, it was possible for a candidate to “buy” his way into Parliament by providing money and goods to voters to entice their votes.
Secondly, voters with one vote under first past the post voting were limited in their choice. With customary obligations often dictating how they exercised that limited choice, voters had no opportunity to vote for good leaders required in a modern government system. The three vote preferences under the LPV system now gives voters more choice. Related to this were the negative social consequences of the limited choice with one vote. In some parts of the country, disputes over who should be given the one vote resulted in conflicts within families, clans and tribes sometimes resulting in open violence. More choice should allow co-operative behaviour and preserve social harmony.
To fully appreciate how a person wins under LPV, one must bear in mind the objectives of LPV.
Under both first past the post voting and LPV, the candidate who receives the highest number of votes wins the election. The difference between the two voting systems relates to what constitutes “highest votes”.
Under first past the post voting, the candidate who received the highest number of votes over other candidates won regardless of whether that number of votes was 5% or 51% of votes cast in the electorate. In an electorate where 35,000 voters voted, for example, a candidate could win with 2,000 votes if there were 25 other candidates who scored less than 2,000 votes. These votes are made up of the one vote from each voter, i.e., 2000 of the one vote.
Under LPV, the law requires that a winner must get 50% plus 1 of the formal votes cast in the electorate to win. In an electorate where there are 35,000 votes that are formal, a candidate who receives 17,501 vote will win. Rules for counting votes enables this result to be achieved.
Understanding the counting rules will assist in understanding how a winner is determined under LPV. There are two distinct parts to counting votes under LPV. The first is the primary count. The first preference vote (that is vote 1) is a voter’s primary vote and this vote is counted first. The first preference votes of all voters are counted first and at the end of this count, it must be determined if a candidate has received 50% + 1 of the first preference votes to be declared winner.
If a candidate receives 50% plus 1 votes of the formal votes cast in the electorate at this stage, the candidate is declared elected and there is no further count. In other words, a candidate who achieves this result wins by the first preference votes only. There is no need to count the second or third preferences. (This count is done in the same way as the count done under first past the post voting).
A candidate who is popular and is liked throughout an electorate, and is able to get the first preference votes of over 50 per cent of the electorate, can win with the first preference votes only. Such a candidate clearly has his/her electorate’s mandate.
Given past voting record in PNG, it is possible but unlikely that a candidate will win with the first preference votes only after the primary count in General Election 2007. From 2002 vote records, Kokopo Open (Sir Rabbie Namaliu) and East Sepik Provincial (Sir Michael Somare) could do this!
All electorates are likely to go into the second part of counting. This is the elimination part where, because no candidate receives 50% + 1 of the primary (or first preference) votes of all formal votes, candidates must be excluded from the count in order to re-distribute second and third preference votes.
The law says that the candidate with the lowest number of votes must be eliminated first, and votes that he or she received are to be redistributed to the remaining candidates according to the second and third preference.
Therefore, where there are 20 candidates, after the primary vote count if no candidate receives 50% + 1 of the formal votes, the candidate who received the lowest number of votes must be excluded.
The votes allocated to him are redistributed to the 19 remaining candidates according to the second preferences indicated on those votes. After this first exclusion and re-distribution of the votes of the excluded candidate, it must be determined if the redistributed votes have given a candidate 50% plus 1 of the formal votes. If a candidate does receive 50% plus 1 of the formal votes after the first exclusion, he/she will be declared.
If not, the next exclusion must be done with the candidate with the lowest number of votes excluded, and his/her votes redistributed to the remaining 18 candidates according to the second and third preferences. After this re-distribution, it must again be determined if a candidate receives 50% + 1 of the formal votes. If a candidate achieves this result, he/she must be declared winner. If not, the third exclusion must be done.
This process continues on and on until a winner is found. And, a winner will always be found under this system.
However, some of the votes will run out of preferences, and are called exhausted votes. As more and more candidates are excluded, the chances increase for more and more votes to be exhausted. As more and more votes become exhausted, the live formal votes remaining decrease. The 50% + 1 wining margin is applied to the remaining “live” votes, which necessarily become smaller and smaller. This explanation of LPV counting will demonstrate a number of things. Two important ones may be highlighted here.
First, it demonstrates the importance of the first preference vote. It is possible for a candidate to win with first preference votes only. Therefore, candidates should seek the first preference vote. However, as noted earlier, it is unlikely that in General Election 2007 candidates will win with first preference votes only. Therefore, second and third preferences will be critical. The second and third preferences will determine the winners in all electorates.
But, the first preference vote will be important for candidates to ensure that they are not excluded/eliminated early in the count. Elimination takes out a candidate from the race.
If eliminated early in the count, all second and third preferences given to the eliminated candidate will not be counted. Therefore, it is important for candidates to get enough first preference votes to stay in the race and collect second and third preference votes given to them. For voters, this explanation will show that second and third preference votes are as important as the firstpreference votes.
The first preference votes will ensure that a candidate is not eliminated early, but it is the second and third preference votes which will determine a winning candidate. Therefore, voters must value the second and third preference votes as high as the first preference vote.
Candidates and political parties are now discussing strategies on how to use LPV to their advantage. One strategy that has been talked about is cited here as the second point to be made about LPV in this article.
Candidates and political parties want to direct their preferences to weaker candidates away from stronger candidates. This strategy is sought to be used to deny preferences to a rival strong candidate. It is thought that if second and third preferences are given to weaker candidates, the rival strong candidate will not win!
To candidates and political parties, this may be a strategy beneficial to them. However, to voters, this is a most negative strategy and is counter productive to voters.
Source: Post Courier Focus
Tuesday 03rd April , 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment