Instant Democracy by the National Alternative Vote

David Chapman

Democracy Design Forum, Suffolk, U.K.

 

7 July 2004

 

 

1. Combining the advantages

This paper puts forward a new electoral system designed to enable a stable and well-functioning democracy to be established in a short time, even at the first election using the system. It could be used in a country without democratic traditions and experience, or in a country where one of the conventional systems is in use but is performing badly. The new system seeks to combine the various advantages which different conventional systems can achieve when they work well. These advantages which the system is designed to obtain are the following.

 

2. Outline of NAV

The new system is referred to as the National Alternative Vote, or NAV for short. NAV is a variation on the Alternative Vote, the system currently used in Australia to elect the lower chamber of the legislature. An outline of NAV is as follows. One party is elected to be the sole government party. This is done by the Alternative Vote method, but used in one nation-wide constituency to elect a whole party, instead of its normal use to elect one MP in a single-member constituency. The government party and the “runner-up” party are designated as the two main parties, and are given a special subsidy in order to strengthen the competition between them. The MPs are elected, also by the Alternative Vote method, each in a single-member constituency, and if the elected government party gets less than a certain fixed majority, it is given extra seats to bring it up to this number.

Under NAV, the required element of Proportional Representation and representation of the smaller opinion groups, is provided not by the MPs of the legislature, but by a separate scheme of “Advisory Representatives”, who are elected and publicly funded lobbyists. These Advisory Representatives can better represent the variety of minority opinions and groups, than could the MPs of a legislature elected by even the most proportional electoral system.

 

3. The rules of NAV

A fuller account of the rules of NAV is as follows. The country is divided into single-member constituencies, that is, one constituency for each MP to be elected. Independent candidates or candidates of small parties may stand, but only parties which have put up a candidate in each constituency are considered for election as the government party. Electors vote by putting the candidates standing in the constituency in order of preference, writing in “1” against the first-preferred candidate, “2” against the second-preferred, and so on.

First, one party is elected as the sole government party. For this purpose, a vote for an individual candidate is counted as a vote for the candidate’s party. The whole country is treated as one nation-wide constituency.

In the first stage of the counting, each vote (that is, each ballot paper) is allocated to that eligible party for whom the voter has indicated the highest preference. (An eligible party is a party which has candidates in all constituencies and so may be elected as government.) If there are more than two eligible parties, the eligible party which has fewest votes is excluded, and its votes are transferred, each vote going to that continuing eligible party for which the voter has indicated next preference. If there are still more than two eligible parties, the eligible party which then has fewest votes is excluded, and its votes are transferred. And so on, if necessary, until there are only two eligible parties remaining.

That one of the two eligible parties which is preferred to the other by more voters is declared elected as the sole government party, and the other is designated as the main opposition party. The government party is guaranteed a certain minimum of seats, a majority of let us say 54 per cent.

It is then determined which of the individual candidates of each party are to be elected as MPs. For this purpose, each candidate’s percentage of the first-preference votes in his constituency is found. The candidate who has the lowest percentage in the whole nation is excluded, and each of his votes is transferred to that continuing candidate in the same constituency for whom the voter expresses next preference. The percentage of each continuing candidate is recalculated, to take account of any votes transferred, and the candidate who then has the lowest percentage in the whole nation is excluded. And so on, transferring votes, recalculating percentages, and excluding the candidate with the lowest percentage in the nation, until either there is only one candidate left in each constituency and each of them is declared elected, or the number of continuing candidates of the elected government party is reduced down to its fixed minimum majority. In the latter case, the candidates of the government party are declared elected, and in the other constituencies, exclusions continue of the candidates with the lowest percentages, until there is only one candidate left in each constituency, and each of them is declared elected.

 

4. Strengthening the two-party system

Each elected MP, whether of the government party, the main opposition party, or some other party, is paid a normal parliamentary salary. But in order to strengthen the two main parties and the competition between them, two additional measures are introduced. Firstly, the non-elected candidates of the government party and of the main opposition party are paid a salary, let us say two-thirds of that of an elected MP. This will enable them to take a more active part in the running of the party, and to campaign for their own election at the end of the current term. Secondly, each of these two main parties is paid a substantial monthly subsidy, the same for either party, in order to quickly establish a “two-party system” of two equally competitive parties.  

 

5. Advisory Representatives

Lastly, this paper puts forward a further new proposal, designed to strengthen the country’s “civil society”, and to make its democratic system more representative. NAV, like any other single-member-constituency system will tend not to give representation to small parties. Therefore, this paper proposes, as an adjunct to the NAV-elected legislature, a system of Advisory Representatives, who are elected by a highly proportional method of election. These Representatives will have only consultative status, and will be without any actual powers in the legislative or governmental process. In brief, electors vote for these Advisory Representatives (ARs for short), and the ARs are paid income in proportion to these votes. Thus with this income, the ARs have both the incentive, and the resources, to lobby on behalf of the electors who have voted for them. 

To explain the scheme in more detail, the elector has one vote, which he may give to one AR, or may split between any number of ARs, in any way he likes. Each AR’s total of votes is then found, and he is given a certain amount of income for each vote obtained (let us say, for each vote, 1/3000 of the average per-person income in that country). However, there are two exceptions: (1) the AR gets no income if he gets fewer votes than some minimum, let us say 500; (2) he gets no more income than some maximum, let us say six times the average income.

The voting is carried out not by use of the normal ballot paper, but by the "coupon" method, which is as follows. A coupon is printed for each AR, at the AR’s expense, and it bears the AR's name and message, and most important, his personal bar-code.  The ARs distribute their coupons to electors they think might vote for them, and also make their coupons available at any polling stations where they think they might have support. The elector votes in the privacy of the polling booth by putting the appropriate coupons in a special envelope provided to him by the polling officer, putting in more than one coupon for a given AR if he wishes. To count the votes, each envelope is opened, and the coupons in it are read by a bar-code reader attached to a computer, which calculates the total votes of each AR. For example, if an elector has put in his envelope one coupon from A and two coupons from B, this will be counted as one-third of a vote for A and two-thirds of a vote for B.

The coupon method should be used for the first election of the ARs. But in later elections, a ballot paper could be used, bearing the names of those ARs who got most votes in that area in the previous election (let us say the top 50 ARs). Any other ARs who sought support in the area could also be voted for, but only by means of coupons.

How then can these Advisory Representatives be expected to operate in practice, and what functions can they be expected to perform? Since they will have no powers in the legislative process, and since they will be extremely diverse in their interests and concerns, it seems unlikely that they will want to meet as a body, in the same way as a conventional second chamber would do. Instead, the ARs will act separately, each lobbying on behalf of the electors who have voted for them with government or parliament or perhaps with business, operating in a similar way to the interest groups which exist at present. These ARs will be better able to articulate the various interests that exist in society, than would any large generalist party, which would be primarily concerned to find a compromise which had wide support.

The ARs will be continually seeking new interests and causes to represent, in order to attract votes from electors who support them. Thus latent interests which at present are not organised at all, will be articulated and will then be able to exert influence. This scheme can be expected to reduce the likelihood of demonstrations and riots, since it provides an alternative way, one which is more peaceful and probably more effective, of making known to the authorities the needs and grievances of the people. In conclusion, the Advisory Representatives scheme is put forward as a means of developing and strengthening the country's "civil society". It is a neutral procedure for introducing public money to strengthen the informal aspects of the democratic process, one which could make the democratic system vastly more representative, while avoiding the potential bias of arbitrary grants.

Return to top of page

Return to home page

 

  Democracy Design Forum, Coles House, Buxhall, Stowmarket, Suffolk IP14 3EB, UK

Tel [int. 44] (0)1449 736 223

Fax [int. 44] (0)1449 612 274

e-mail: chapman@democdesignforum.co.uk