Svenska Yle is reporting that the four government parties (Centre, National Coalition, SFP and the Greens) have agreed to propose introducing a law that would make it necessary for political parties to win at least 3% of the vote in a parliamentary election in order to gain representation. Originally, a 3,5% minimum was proposed. SFP had strongly opposed this.
This move is a backwards step for democracy. Had it existed at the time, it is unlikely that smaller, more recent arrivals to parliament, such as the Greens and the True Finns would have made it in to the parliament. Regardless what one thinks of the True Finns, this would have been anti-democratic. It is particularly surprising perhaps that the Greens, now in government, support this regulation.
What this 3% minimum will do is to make it much harder for small parties to get a foothold in parliament in the future. Thus the 3% barrier will consolidate the positions of the exisiting parliamentary parties. It will particularly favour the largest parties; Centre, National Coalition and SDP. They may see their support increase, as people considering voting for a party that is predicted in opinion polls to only just make it over 3% may see voting for that party as dangerous for their vote, if it is to count. Instead, they might just give their vote to a bigger party, sure of getting over 3% instead. If introduced, this 3% barrier will lead to more wasted votes. Hardly democratic.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
Wednesday 20.5.09 at 16:01
willie
I agree. This would truly be a step backwards. The attitude of the Greens doesn’t surprise me at all. I truly respect the parliamentary system as it currently is. Back home (the U.S.), even though their are officially more than two parties, in practice only two are represented at the national level. Often people who support the smaller parties end up voting for the major ones because they feel that otherwise their voice will go unheard. If the Finnish government proposes this procentage limit (why 3 percent ? how did they arrive at this magic number) then in my opinion, representational democracy will cease to exist and be replaced my a system where voters are held hostage by the major parties.
Thursday 21.5.09 at 13:19
Jonas
Indeed, I don’t understand the reasoning for 3% (or anything other than 0%) either. The original proposal was for 3,5% nationwide and 12% in each electoral district. SFP opposed this – and originally any reform with a minimum threshold involved at all. Instead, that had advocated simply merging some of the smaller voting districts to make for a more proportional situation and to stop Tarja Cronberg type situations happening again (her failure to get elected despite 12 000 personal votes in the last election in the small North Karelia district is one of the given motivations for the law). The government’s programme called for any voting reform decision to be made unanimously. So, why SFP has changed its mind now and agreed to a watered down, but still anti-democractic, 3% threshold is questionable. It is likely to be pragmatic; i.e. better to be able to influence it now when in government than risk an even worse reform being introduced by any next government – which may not include SFP.
One note, our constitution requires changes of this magnitude to be ratified in two separate parliaments. So, this could still be quashed. Especially if the SDP were to do well in the next election. They have come out against this reform (and instead for a merging type of reform of which SFP previously had stated it would prefer). It’s probably material for an entire new post, but it doesn’t look impossible for Centre to come third in any next election with SDP taking second place. This would give Kokoomus a dilemma. Break the recent consensus of forming coalitions including the two biggest parties, as a reflection of the popular will – or go for a continued coalition with a weakened Centre party (but obviously with Kok taking the PM post) that would be more ideologically friendly. I suspect they’d do the latter.
Wednesday 27.5.09 at 18:55
giustino
Hej Jonas,
You should know that I started learning Swedish this past semester, and that I plan to continue. Where are you based? I need all the Swedish-speaking friends I can get.
Giustino
Monday 8.6.09 at 18:40
Jonas
Hej Giustino!
Sorry to take so long to get back to you. I have not been monitoring my blog so well until yesterday – busy, busy. That sounds an interesting choice by you, are you studying a course at the university in Tartu – the second oldest university in the “Swedish-speaking” world? Not that that world is so intact these days…
I am based in Borgå/Porvoo but I am, for work, spending a lot of time in the UK just now. Back in Finland full-time from midsummer, I hope.
Saturday 30.1.10 at 5:00
Swedish People’s Party discusses a change of name « Svenskfinland in English
[...] easily sway this new group’s voting intention. In addition to that, the coming voting form (of questionable democratic credentials) will make it harder in the future for SFP to gain parliamentary representation. We [...]