The first merit of proportional representation is that it secures representation to all parties and groups in the nation in proportion to their voting strength. It makes the legislature a true mirror of the nation, as it must be in a democracy, based on equality and liberty. Secondly, every minority has and equal chance to win seats in the legislature, especially if it is a racial, linguistic or religious minority which is permanent in character and can never hope to become a majority. It thus produces a sense of security and satisfaction among the minorities. Thirdly, the very fact that the single transferable vote system is a complicated affair and makes it necessary for the voter to. indicate his preference has an educative value.
The voter is compelled to reflect over the qualifications of the various candidates before he shows his preference. This develops his civic sense and makes him an intelligent citizen who has to consider the issues involved. Fourthly, proportional representation prevents any sudden and radical changes in the State constitution. It gives birth to multiple parties with various interests in the legislature, and thus makes coalition government necessary. Such governments do not favour radical and extreme measures and laws for they are the result of compromise. In short, this system recognises the pluralistic nature of modern society and gives a direct voice to all groups and interests in the law-making body.
Demerits of Proportional Representation.
It has more defects than merits. Practical experience has revealed many weaknesses in it some of which are of serious nature. First of all, proportional representation system lacks simplicity which is the requisite of a good electoral system. The need for indicating preferences, quota, etc., are things which the ordinary voters do not understand and the electoral officers cannot properly deal with. Secondly, all methods of proportional representation require large-sized multiple-member constituencies which hinder a direct and personal contact between the voters and the candidates. Hence proportional representation “destroys all prospects of personal relations between the member and his constituent she would simply become an item in a list, voted for almost entirely on party grounds.” It increases the influence of the party bosses.
It increases the influence of the party organisation and opens the door to such electoral evils as demagoguism, bribery, party intrigues, etc. By-elections are almost possible under this system. Thirdly, it encourages minority thinking and “splintering”. It produces multiple parties and groups and thus fragmentariness the legislature. The voters and the candidates all think of and fight for groups’ interests.
The legislature is filled with several parties and groups which destroy the national character of the legislature and make it an arena of divergent sectional and party interests. It causes several weaknesses. All laws are the result of compromise and serve party interests. Hence legislation becomes class legislation. Cabinets are coalition cabinets which are notoriously unstable and weak. Further, the coalition cabinets are unstable and irresponsible, weak and vacillating in policy and administration. All these defects can hardly help the legislature and executive to express the general will of the nation. Lastly, opinion and interests of the minorities cannot be safeguarded by such electoral devices as the proportional representation. The need is of a sound national economic system and a good moral character of the people, i.e., as Laski says “by the elevation of the popular standard of intelligence and the reform of the neatly graded volume of opinion.” On the other hand, proportional representation has not secured better representation. It has engendered such evils as party intrigues, jobbery, and bossism.
Conclusion.
Proportional representation violates some of the basic principles of political science and practice. Political decisions are not made by counting votes alone.” Most urgent is the weighting of influences “as Sidgwick says, “that take place in the law-making process. And minority views may find adequate institutions therein for the expression of their opinions and desires.” The French Jurist, Esmien, has condemned it, for “to establish the system of proportional representation is to convert the remedy supplied by the bicameral system into a veritable poison; it is to organise disorder, and emasculate the legislative power; it is to render cabinets unstable, destroy their homogeneity and make parliamentary government impossible.” To conclude: “However useful for a debating society, it is useless as a means of establishing an instrument of government.” In Germany and Italy it had been the stepping-stone for the establishment of fascist dictatorships.
thanks for saving my assignment which i am to submit tomorrow