Change the vote system to liberate the vote
The answer to a circumspect Pakatan Harapan, a waning Umno and frustrated voters is to end the first past the post (FPTP) elections in Malaysia.
Praba Ganesan, The Malay Mail Online
The Election Commission can provide much relief to the country by implementing a new voting system at the 15th General Election.
This column has championed the reform of our elections for years, and a preferential (also referred to as alternative) system will improve radically the democratic outcome at our polls. Other methods are equally welcome to be debated, but certainly what’s imperative is the retirement of the FPTP.
Presently, strategic voting trumps a sincere effort to gauge the qualified intention of voters.
Actually doable
It is possible now.
Realities like the new independence for the EC under Parliament would empower the commission to study, rationalise and implement in the three years leading up to a possible election in 2021.
Barisan Nasional (BN) relied on vote fractions from various segments which its opponents were incapable of.
PAS can dominate Islamist votes but are then heavily opposed by secularists, and DAP dominates non-Muslim vote only to be a zero with Muslim voters. BN navigates the sentiments to win through the FPTP system. Enough bits from all segments add up to victory.
But today, BN is dead, in the Semenanjung and Borneo. There is no natural advantage with the FPTP for Umno, as it can only draw support from fewer segments. Therefore, the 40 or 50 MPs the party still possesses — subject to a proper loyalty pledge, most certainly in Sabah — might find a reform attractive.
They can work to draw the second vote from PAS voters who are neither enamoured by Mahathir nor pleased with the secularism of Keadilan. Umno can be the destination of the second rank among Muslim voters, which will bear fruit all across the west coast of the Semenanjung.
Electoral reform is not merely theory, today.
Who is top dog in Pakatan?
The rehashed argument among Pakatan Harapan supporters, is the relative strength of the various coalition members, or pertinently who is strongest. The issue has picked pace with the disproportionate number of ministries in the Cabinet to party weightage, as decided by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.
One school argues, especially with the uniform adoption of the Keadilan (PKR) logo at GE14, that the vote for any candidate was for the Pakatan brand rather than the respective parties.
Curiously, just as many argue because the parties only used one party’s emblem — despite the partners reassuring their base they are still voting for DAP, Pribumi and Amanah even if they marked the EYE — the rakyat were indeed selecting Keadilan more so than Pakatan as a whole, because they have built the brand over two decades.
Obviously, non-PKR fanboys claim that it has always been a vote for the coalition collectively so counting the worth of members based on which party the respective MPs are from does not matter. The 113 seats won should be equally distributed to all four parties.
So does PKR own 50 of the 120 — higher count after party hops since polling day — or not?
A preferential vote would allow PKR, Pribumi and Amanah to appear on the same vote chit, and advise their voters in their campaign to place any of the three as their top three in their preferred order, and always, always list Umno and PAS at the bottom.
The true strength of the Pakatan parties will be revealed, without the risk of strategic vote under FPTP dictating a Umno victory through vote splits.
Then, the Pakatan parties can assert their true value in the minds of the voters, rather than guesstimate their true vote. Otherwise, the debate never is resolved.
