One is that if there's a party that gets the most votes but not a majority of the seats that could be a "recipe for political riots and civil unrest". Voters in Mauritius don't give two hoots about vote share. They just pick the best candidates in every riding. Doesn't matter if they're from three different parties. And the party which elects the most candidates forms government. That's it. Of course a party can grab power without getting the most votes. That's definitely possible given how the number of voters in our constituencies vary. In 2014 the largest (No.14) was 2.71X bigger than the smallest (No.3). But we couldn't care less.
Besides the recipe for riots and unrest is well known: poverty and inequality. Like we saw one spring six or seven years ago across North Africa and the Middle East and next door. We even had a former Minister in Tunisia at that time who had to stay indoors because of what was happening on the streets. It didn't look like the people were mad because they had trouble grasping how the D'Hondt method works.
The second mari dumb reason is that an electoral system is fair when it "ensures that the top guns of the parties are returned to the Assembly... On the other hand, the public would have considerable difficulties to understand constituency elections without the participation of these stalwarts; such contests would lose some of its “panache” and legitimacy [emphasis mine]."
So 22,000 people thrown into poverty over five years, record inequality, savings at a 30-year low and a trillion-rupee GDP gap because of a stupid and low 15% flat tax is panache? And we should return the massively incompetent and the toxic? The mess of the trickle-down garbage was big enough that no major party wanted to take the oversized and unnecessary risk of having the outgoing Finance Minister as their candidate in 2010. Which was a first. And he didn't even run as an independent candidate. Didn't get elected four and half years later either. That too after changing for a 'safe' riding.
God bless the FPTP.
Besides the recipe for riots and unrest is well known: poverty and inequality. Like we saw one spring six or seven years ago across North Africa and the Middle East and next door. We even had a former Minister in Tunisia at that time who had to stay indoors because of what was happening on the streets. It didn't look like the people were mad because they had trouble grasping how the D'Hondt method works.
The second mari dumb reason is that an electoral system is fair when it "ensures that the top guns of the parties are returned to the Assembly... On the other hand, the public would have considerable difficulties to understand constituency elections without the participation of these stalwarts; such contests would lose some of its “panache” and legitimacy [emphasis mine]."
So 22,000 people thrown into poverty over five years, record inequality, savings at a 30-year low and a trillion-rupee GDP gap because of a stupid and low 15% flat tax is panache? And we should return the massively incompetent and the toxic? The mess of the trickle-down garbage was big enough that no major party wanted to take the oversized and unnecessary risk of having the outgoing Finance Minister as their candidate in 2010. Which was a first. And he didn't even run as an independent candidate. Didn't get elected four and half years later either. That too after changing for a 'safe' riding.
God bless the FPTP.