ONE of the biggest differences between voting in the European, Scottish and UK elections, is the system used to choose MEPs in all but one of the UK’s constituencies.
It is called the d’Hondt method, and is a type of proportional representation (PR) named after Belgian mathematician Victor d’Hondt who devised it in the 1880s to improve Belgium’s parliamentary system.
His method has two formats – an open list, where voters select preferred candidates, and a closed list in which the parties are chosen.
EU elections use a closed list, so we vote for a party and not an individual candidate for Scotland’s six places in the European Parliament.
The first seat to be allocated goes to the top candidate of the party that wins most votes.
Then – and this is where it starts to sound complicated – the first party’s vote share is halved, and the party which now has the most votes gets the second seat.
This process repeats itself, with the share of the top party in each round being divided by one plus the number of MEPs they have had elected in the constituency so far in the process, until all the seats are allocated.
It is unlikely, therefore, that candidates at the bottom of a party list will be elected; but they may still become MEPs if an elected candidate later resigns and a replacement is needed.
This process is used by several EU member states to elect MEPs, and within the European Parliament itself to distribute chairs of the parliamentary committees and delegations.
It is also used to elect members of the London Assembly and as a national voting system around the world.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here