Letter: Electoral reform distractions - Business Day

John Jeffery makes some valid points in his discussion of the electoral system, but also throws out a few red herrings (“First-past-the-post constituency system not the way to go”, October 8).

He states that some of those lobbying for electoral reform would like to see a return to a first-past-the-post (FPTP) “Westminster” system, and notes grave problems with that system. But there has been no serious lobbying for a return to the FPTP system that has not included some form of parallel top-up of seats to ensure proportionality.

On its own a FPTP system would not pass muster anyway as the constitution requires any electoral system to be proportional.

Regarding a mixed system such as the one SA uses at municipal level, with half the representatives being elected from geographical constituencies and the other half from party lists, Jeffery also argues that there are flaws (scaling this up to national level would cause 200 MPs to be elected from geographical constituencies).

In such a system MPs elected from constituencies would represent 300,000 people on average, which he says is too many to ensure accountability. But we don’t know if this would be true — legislators in India and the US represent, on average, far more people than MPs would in the hypothetical SA system.

In a mixed-system with single-member constituencies we could have 300 MPs elected from constituencies with 100 MPs elected from party lists to ensure proportionality. Modelling shows that such a system would retain proportionality.

Jeffery also neglects to mention the electoral system proposed by the Van Zyl Slabbert report of 2003. In such a system 300 MPs would be elected from 69 constituencies, each returning three to seven MPs. There would also be 100 MPs elected from party lists to once again ensure proportionality. This system should be seriously considered.

Jeffery asks whether the mixed system used at municipal level has contributed to governance instability. I would argue that it’s not our electoral system that has caused instability but rather the behaviour of politicians, including those from Jeffery’s own party.

SA now has a chance to reform the electoral system to ensure more accountability and deepen democracy. We dare not let this opportunity slip.

Marius Roodt
Institute of Race Relations

https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/opinion/letters/2024-10-10-letter-electoral-reform-distractions/