Combining the above with ordered party lists where the voters cannot affect the order of candidates on a list, it is about the worst proportional election system which could have been introduced. It is however better than first past the post.
How does the Swedish electoral system decide which candidate on a list is elected? Is it up to the parties or do the voters decide the order of individual candidate as well as choosing a party?
For example, one can mark number 18 and that one will then be prioritised. A candidate needs like 10 % of the votes that a certain party gets in a certain area to override the party list order. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
It should be noted that fixed (and rather high) limit in percentage of the votes has produced some odd results. Consider if one party takes one seat in an area and another takes ten. It is then more likely that the small partys one seat will be filled by someone who has got marked up then it is that the big party gets any candidate marked up. At least this has been the experience in Sweden. How come? Simple, because the limit is high it is seldom candidates reach above it and when there are many prominent candidates (like in the big party) it splits the marks over many candidates.
I would prefer the finnish system were (IIRC) that you place your vote on a candidate, that vote also falls to respective candidates party, seats are distributed to parties according to PR and then party seats are filled with candidates in accordance to number of votes.
But mostly I prefer to have a good and strong referendum instrument like in Switzerland. Then I guess what way you chose the parliament would not matter as much. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
Great Britain (not Northern Ireland) uses the d'Hondt system in European elections, with small seat magnitude constituencies (3-10 seats) and no attempt at proportionality on the national level. Combining the above with ordered party lists where the voters cannot affect the order of candidates on a list, it is about the worst proportional election system which could have been introduced. It is however better than first past the post.
Currently my preferred voting system is an additional-member system with single-transferable vote. Combining this with open party list for the top-up seats would be the best of all worlds. Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
