For much of the post-war period, Italy was famous for having a very proportional electoral system – but this all changed in 1993 when they created a system that mixed First Past the Post and Proportional Representation, nicknamed ‘Mattarellum’. Since then the Italians have changed their voting system on a semi-regular basis, as politicians try to get a result they want. ‘Porcellum’ was introduced in 2005 and ‘Rosatellum’in 2017.
The current ‘Rosatellum’ system is mix of proportional representation and First Past the Post, which is how Georgia Meloni’s right bloc (Brothers of Italy, the League and Forza Italia) managed to turn 43% of the vote into a comfortable majority in 2022. But, faced with changing voting patterns, Georgia Meloni is looking towards that most Italian solution, changing the voting system.
Georgia Meloni’s proposal for a new system would promise a fair seat allocation and remove the First Past the Post seats, yet, at the same time, lobbing undeserved extra seats to the biggest bloc which, quelle surprise, my apologies, che sorpresa, could help her in elections next year.
The proposed Italian electoral law
Under proposals approved by the Chamber of Deputies on the 16th July, the country’s current mixed electoral system would be replaced by a fully proportional model. That’s a big positive, but as always, whenever some government, party or politician advocates for changing the voting system, the diavolo is in the detail.
Ok I will stop with the rudimentary Italian – promiso.
The proposed system is Party List Proportional Representation, but, and here it is, any coalition winning more than 42 per cent of the national vote would just be given a big seat bonus, which means it could govern with a parliamentary majority.
In practice, this would mean they would be handed an additional 70 seats in the 400 member Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of the parliament, and 35 seats in the 200 member Senate. To make this look a little bit reasonable, they also want limits to be placed on the total number of seats the winning coalition could hold, which would stop them having a huge parliamentary majority. See it’s not all bad… but it’s still not great.
Stability vs Democracy
Beyond the argument from self-interest, there are voices for the change that argue it would make the results of Italian elections a little more decisive, allowing more stability in the nation’s politics. But we should always tread carefully in the push for stability over democracy.
Georgia Meloni is due to become Italy’s longest-serving postwar prime minister in September, so why do they need a new system to deliver stabilty?
Even systems that are supposed to deliver stability fail when voters don’t behave the way politicians want them to.
Of course, supporters of Westminster’s status quo often point towards first past the post as the best system for stable government, but it’s been anything but for a decade? Labour got the equivilent of roughly 192 ‘bonus seats’ on 33.7% of the vote in 2024. Consider for a moment that since Giorga Meloni came to power in 2022 we have had 4 Prime Ministers.
Look, I get it, a winner’s bonus is kind of understandable for politicians who just want their lives in government to be easier, but come on, democracy means accepting the consequences of a fair vote, the actual choice of electors. The state is not a ship that needs to be stabilised against a force of nature, they are talking about stabilising it against the views of voters.
If the country hasn’t voted for a majority party or coalition then who the hell is anyone to think they should have one? If politicians can’t make it work, that isn’t the system failing, that is the failure of individuals or parties, by not seeking dialogue or common ground.
So what’s next? The proposed law needs to pass the Senate.
Staremo a vedere – We’ll see what happens.
Do you think electoral systems matter?
Members support our work in parliament, in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.
Join the ERS today