Why a vote for AD is a vote for Alfred Sant

Ircivejt din l-email u nemmen li fiha argumenti tajbin li wiehed ghandu jixtarr:

Why a vote for AD is a vote for Alfred Sant
1. If there are 3 parties in Parliament and no one has 50%+ of the No 1 votes, there is no corrective mechanism and the seat result counts.
BUT following changes in the district boundaries, this time round Labour has the districts in its favour. As a result it will certainly elect additional seats (to the 30 it elected last time) in the:
· 1st district which now has Marsa and a Labourite part of St Venera,
· 2nd district which now has Zabbar rather than Fgura (Zabbar is more Labour than Fgura which means 4 seats again for Labour in the 2nd division),
· 7th district which now has Rabat instead of Attard (Rabat has a small Labour majority to Attard's overwhelming PN majority now resulting in this district electing 3 Labour MPs), and
· 10th district which now has Gzira (half half) instead of Swieqi (overwhelmingly PN) thus resulting in a 3-2 rather than 2003's 4-1.

2. So, come what may, Labour will get the outright majority of seats, ie. 34 out of 65.

3. Here's the quirk in the system. If PN gets more votes than the MLP, and there's no one else in Parliament, the corrective mechanism works and the PN's seats will be increased so that it has more than Labour BUT if there is another party in Parliament (e.g. AD), the corrective mechanism DOES NOT COME INTO EFFECT and Labour, having an absolute majority of seats, will govern alone, even if the PN has more votes !

4. Typical scenario: PN 48% with 30 seats; MLP 47% with 34 seats; AD with 4% with 1 seat, AN 1% with no seat. The result? Alfred Sant safe in Castile and the PN and AD together in coalition IN OPPOSITION.