NO UNANIMITY seems to be emerging within the MMM/ MSM alliance on the way to implement electoral reform. Though both parties agree the ?First Past the Post? (FPTP) system is undemocratic, they are not agreed on how to bring about the change. The opposition believes that the reform might come to nothing.

The issue was part of the government?s electoral manifesto. Soon after its victory, it appointed the Sachs Commission to ?make proposals regarding representation in Parliament on a proportional basis within the existing electoral system?. The commission made its recommendations two years ago and the National Assembly set up a Select Committee, chaired by MMM secretary-general and MP, Ivan Collendavelloo, to make concrete proposals for its implementation. Since the committee has not reached a consensus, the chairman has submitted his report containing two proposals to the Speaker, leaving to Parliament the choice. The bone of contention concerns the 30 PR seats proposed by the Sachs Commission.

The latter recommended a PR Model C, that is, ?62 seats in the Assembly as at present, with 20 constituencies each returning three members and Rodrigues two members (?) and a further 30 members chosen from lists provided by parties receiving more than 10 % of the national vote?. In addition to choosing three candidates, the elector has to vote for a party list, from which will be chosen the 30 MPs according to the number of votes polled by their party.

This system would thus be different from the Best Loser System (BLS) where a candidate obtains his seat in Parliament because of his ethnic community. The commission guaranteed this system ?would allow for a greater degree of fairness whilst still heavily favouring stability (?) We believe that on all the available evidence PR Model C clearly heads the field, meeting the criteria in a balanced and harmonious way with an acceptably low degree of risk.? The party list proposed aims at compensating under-representation.

The Select Committee, composed of three MMM MPs, three MSM MPs and three opposition MPs, has met for the past two years. The main hurdle has been the 30 RP seats. The report contains two distinct formulas. The first, supported by the MMM members, recommends they be allotted from pre-established party-lists.

The alternative, suggested by Emmanuel Leung Shing, MSM spokesman on the committee, consists in choosing them through the present BLS. Although the Sachs Commission said clearly it was against that system, the committee has decided to include the proposal ?in fairness? though ?it would hardly touch on the disproportionality emanating from the present system.?

Ivan Collendavelloo has expressed his disagreement with this parallel proposal. ?The compensatory formula is, by itself, a compromise between FPTP and strict PR. The parallel formula is only a way of providing us with the beginning of a debate but not with the solution to the problem.? The committee has pointed out the ?inherent unfairness within our electoral system. (?) In 1991, the MSM/MMM alliance, with 944,521 votes (i.e. 55.36%) secured 57 seats while the Alliance PTR/PMSD with 670,631 votes (i.e. 39.3%) secured only 3 seats.? All parties agree that there is a disproportion between votes polled and seats received. However, they are not sure to what extent PR will solve the problem.

The MSM seems to see in the 30 PR seats a risk of toppling the balance of power between the two partners. The example of Rodrigues has also been quoted as a possibility of changing the rapport between government and opposition. Madun Dulloo, opposition member of the committee, believes there will be no follow-up to the report. For him, government has better things to do than increase the number of MPs.

The MMM also proposed that six women be included in the first twelve names of the party list to do justice to the role of women in society, though not being a quota system. This proposal has been rejected by the MSM, who refuse ?positive discrimination?.

For the time being, the Prime Minister and MMM leader, Paul Bérenger, has refrained from comments on the issue. He says that there will be no ?party line?, that he ?keeps an open mind? and that he is prepared to study all proposals.

On the other hand, the deputy PM and MSM leader, Pravind Jugnauth, has clearly stated his disagreement with Ivan Collendavelloo?s proposal as it could breed a ?germ of instability?. Moreover, as Finance minister, he suggests that the number of PR MPs be reduced to 10 so as not to burden the national budget.

The leaders of both parties in power however deny the rumours of disagreement in the alliance. They say that a debate on the issue is justified, as it is really important for the country. According to them, there is no division between the parties.

?There is unanimity that a measure of proportional representation should be introduced to ensure that our electoral system becomes fairer, more democratic, more representative and gives an adequate opportunity for those who vote against government to have their voices heard in Parliament?, the report of the Select Committee states. However, differences and suspicions between the two main parties could jeopardize the chances of reforming an electoral system that is deplored by everybody.

?In 1991, the MSM/MMM alliance, with 944,521 votes (55.36%) secured 57 seats while the PTR/PMSD alliance with 670,631 votes (39.3%) secured only 3 seats.?