June 2001
by John C. Lane
The transferring of votes on successive counts of the ballots is an essential and conspicuous aspect of STV. The repeated counting of ballots -- carried out for long hours by a small army of officials and observed by anxious candidates and their supporters -- is a mix of tedium and excitement and often a source of perplexity for the voters. How necessary is this counting process? What difference would it make if only the first-count votes were used to determine the winners of an election?
In a recent article in the British journal Representation (Winter 2000 issue, pp. 187-193) entitled "Does the Transfer of Votes Really Matter?" Professor Neal Jesse addressed two questions: First, "how often is a transfer of votes needed for a candidate to secure a seat" and, second, "how often does the transfer of votes produce a winning candidate who was not a leading candidate before the transfer?" Jesse examined election results both under STV in Ireland and under the Alternative Vote system in Australia for an answer to his two questions. This note will undertake a parallel examination for Malta where STV has been in use since 1921.
(I) How often are vote transfers needed to determine a winner?
In Ireland, Jesse found, there were 451 instances (out of 1,856) where a candidate had a sufficient number of votes on the first count to be declared elected. But in 1,405 (or 75.7%) of the cases a candidate only won his or her seat after vote transfers had occurred.
This ratio is quite similar for Malta in its 18 parliamentary elections from 1921 to 1998, as Table 1 demonstrates: Of the 873 seats at stake, 704 (80.6%) required vote transfers for the winners to be determined; the remaining 169 (19.4%) of the candidates had more than the required quota on the first count.
Table 1: Vote Transfers (Not) Required +------+-------+---------------+-------------+ | | Seats | No Transfer | Transfer | | Year | at | Votes Needed | Votes Needed| | | Stake +------+--------+------+------| | | | N | % | N | % | +------+-------+---------------+-------------+ | 1921 | 32 | 11 34.4 | 21 65.6 |-(a) | 1924 | 32 | 8 25.0 | 24 75.0 |-(a) | 1927 | 32 | 10 31.3 | 22 68.8 |-(a) | 1932 | 32 | 6 18.8 | 26 81.3 |-(a) | 1947 | 40 | 10 25.0 | 30 75.0 | | 1950 | 40 | 4 10.0 | 36 90.0 | | 1951 | 40 | 5 12.5 | 35 87.5 | | 1953 | 40 | 3 7.5 | 37 92.5 | | 1955 | 40 | 4 10.0 | 36 90.0 | | 1962 | 50 | 6 12.0 | 44 88.0 | | 1966 | 50 | 7 14.0 | 43 86.0 | | 1971 | 55 | 9 16.4 | 46 83.6 |-(b) | 1976 | 65 | 11 16.9 | 54 83.1 | | 1981 | 65 | 15 23.1 | 50 76.9 | | 1987 | 65 | 20 30.8 | 45 69.2 | | 1992 | 65 | 14 21.5 | 51 78.5 | | 1996 | 65 | 12 18.5 | 53 81.5 | | 1998 | 65 | 14 21.5 | 51 78.5 | +------+-------+---------------+-------------+ | All | 873 | 169 19.4 | 704 80.6 | +------+-------+---------------+-------------+
Jesse also controlled for constituency size, finding that in Irish constituencies with three seats, 28% of the winners did not require vote transfers; in 4-member districts the percentage fell to 21%; and in 5-member districts it was at 22%. In Malta, the relationship with constituency size is similarly inconclusive: In 4-member districts, 27.3% of the seats were filled without a need for transferred votes; the percentage fell to 17.8% for 5-member districts and rose to 23.3% in the handful of 6-member districts.
There are two aspects other than constituencies size that appear to be related to the prevalence of first-count winners. First, as Table 1 shows, fewer candidates (in absolute numbers and percentage terms) managed to obtain the quota on the first round when there was multi-party competition, from 1950 to 1966, than in elections from 1976 to 1996 when two-party competition prevailed. The relationship, however, is not consistent.
Second is the prominent presence of incumbents who sought re-election, as the figures in Table 2 reveal. Theirs has been a very substantial share of the seats won and it is these incumbents who account for nearly every seat that was won without resort to vote transfers.
Table 2: Incumbents as Candidates and Winners +-------+------------------------------------+ | | Incumbents' Percentage Share of: | | |------------+--------+--------------+ | | All | All | Seats Won | | Year | Candidacies| Seats | Without | | | | Won |Transfer Votes| +-------+------------+--------+--------------+ | 1924 | 30.93 | 65.63 | 100.00 | | 1927 | 41.98 | 59.38 | 90.00 | | 1932 | 44.44 | 71.88 | 83.33 | | 1947 | 10.48 | 25.00 | 70.00 | | 1950 | 28.34 | 60.00 | 100.00 | | 1951 | 34.62 | 70.00 | 100.00 | | 1953 | 30.23 | 70.00 | 100.00 | | 1955 | 33.10 | 80.00 | 100.00 | | 1962 | 15.23 | 46.00 | 100.00 | | 1966 | 25.00 | 64.00 | 100.00 | | 1971 | 30.65 | 81.82 | 100.00 | | 1976 | 35.84 | 73.85 | 90.91 | | 1981 | 38.96 | 86.15 | 93.33 | | 1987 | 37.19 | 75.38 | 90.00 | | 1992 | 42.28 | 80.00 | 85.71 | | 1996 | 35.89 | 80.00 | 100.00 | | 1998 | 36.52 | 89.23 | 100.00 | +-------+------------+--------+--------------+ | All | 31.96 | 71.34 | 93.04 | +-------+------------+--------+--------------+
Leaving behind the matter of candidates who already meet or exceed the quota on the first count, there is the question of what difference the vote transfers made to the fortunes of candidates. Were the candidates' standings on the first vote count substantially affected by the subsequent vote transfers?
Following Professor Jesse's approach, we can identify in each district the number of "leading candidates," that is, the four or five or six (matching the number of seats in the district) candidates who received the highest number of votes on the first count.
Table 3: "Leading Candidates" Ultimately (Not) Gaining a Seat
+--------------------+
| Adjusted: After |
| Casual Elections |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+--------------------+
| District | Total|Leaders|Leaders|Leaders | Leaders | Leaders |
| Size | Seats|Winning|Losing |Losing | Not |Not Seated|
| | | | | (in %) | Seated | (in %) |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+---------+----------+
| 4 Seats | 128 | 112 | 16 | 12.50 | 14 | 10.94 |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+---------+----------+
| 5 Seats | 715 | 609 | 106 | 14.83 | 88 | 12.31 |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+---------+----------+
| 6 Seats | 30 | 24 | 6 | 20.00 | 6 | 20.00 |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+---------+----------+
| All | 873 | 745 | 128 | 14.66 | 108 | 12.37 |
+----------+------+-------+-------+---------+---------+----------+
Note: The two right-hand columns take into account the results after
the "casual elections" which must be conducted when a candidate resigns
one of two seats he had won in the general election.
Table 3 shows that of a total of 873 leadings candidates only 128 (14.66%) eventually failed to win a seat after the transfer of votes was completed. As district size increases, so does the rate of failure: In 6-seat district leading candidates were almost twice as likely to be denied a seat than in 4-seat districts (although the small number of cases of constituencies with other than 5 seats should caution against drawing a firm conclusion.) Most elections in Malta have been conducted in 5-seat districts and in these, about fifteen percent of the candidates with the highest first-count votes were denied a seat in the legislature.
When casual elections are taken into account, we find that an even greater majority of all contests are effectively decided on the first count: Of 873 leading candidates, 765 eventually gained seats in Parliament and whereas only 108 (12.37%) failed to do so.
Leaving aside the personal disappointment of candidates who started with high vote totals only to see themselves overtaken by others as the counts proceeded, the question arises of how consequential this was from the perspective of the political parties.
It turns out that in approximately one-third of the cases (46 of the 128), the initial leaders were overtaken at the finish line by another candidate of the same political party. The change of individual political fortunes consequently did not, in these cases, affect the numerical strength of the parties in parliament. However, in the remaining 82 instances a leading candidate of one party was replaced in the winning column by a candidate of another party who had obtained fewer first-preference votes. (See Table 4, which appears as an appendix to this note, for the years and districts where this occurred.)
Hypothetical Results
The results described above prompt the question of what would have happened if there had been no requirement to proceed with additional counts and instead the leading candidates on the first count were declared winners of the available seats.
This is, of course, a purely speculative exercise. If the rules had actually provided that the leading candidates on the first count be declared elected then parties and voters might well have altered their behavior. Political parties might have fielded a different number of candidates; the candidates might have pursued a different campaign strategy; and the voters might have been inclined to cast their vote differently. But let us assume here that only the rules, not political behavior, had changed.
When we examine these hypothetical results (detailed in Table 4) we see that 82 seats are indeed occupied by members of a different party. However, the changed sizes of parliamentary parties would have had no effect on the majority or minority status of the parties in any except two instances. Two examples of merely incremental effects: The Constitutionalist Party's hypothetical gain of three additional seats in the 1927 election would only have enhanced, but would not have created, its majority status; similarly, the PN majority in 1992 would have increased from three seats to nine.
In only a single instance, the election of 1976, would the balance of parliamentary strength have been reversed, with the MLP majority of three seats becoming a PN majority of one. A second, less extreme, case is the election of 1953 where the governing coalition (PN and MWP with a combined seat total of 21) would have obtained only 20 seats, the same as the MLP opposition.
Thus, if the leading candidates on the first count had been declared the winners without any subsequent vote transfers, the consequences for the parties' majority or minority status in Parliament and the forming of governments would almost always (in 16 of 18 elections) have been nil.
None of this, of course, constitutes a case for abandoning the wearisome vote transfer process required by STV. But the exercise suggests that STV vote transfers create results which, to a remarkable degree, a simpler process could also have achieved.
Those interested in the specific instances of unsuccessful leading candidates may consult Table 5 in Appendix B, below.
In Table 4, the second column indicates the particular election district in which a leading candidate from one party was ultimately overtaken by a candidate from another party. The third and fourth columns indicate the parties involved and the "Net Changes" column summarizes the overall shift in the election. The right-most columns show the numerical strength of the parties in the actual election (with the party or parties forming the Government identified by an asterisk) and then the hypothetical distribution of seats.
Table 4: Hypothetical Changes if the Leading Candidates Had Been
Awarded the Available Seats
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| | Gain Loss | | Parliamentary Seats: |
|Year Dist.| By: By: | Net changes| Original |
| | | | Hypothetical|
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
|1921 2nd | MLP UPM | MLP + 1 | CON 7 8 |
| 3rd | CON UPM | CON + 1 | MLP 7 8 |
| 5th | CON MLP | UPM - 2 | *UPM 14 12 |
| 6th | MLP CON | | DNP 4 4 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1924 1st | UPM DNP | UPM + 2 | CON 10 10 |
| 2nd | UPM MLP | MLP - 2 | *DNP 5 5 |
| 6th | CON MLP | | MLP 7 5 |
| 8th | DNP CON | | *UPM 10 12 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1927 3rd | CON MLP | CON + 3 | *CON 15 18 |
| 4th | CON MLP | MLP - 2 | MLP 3 1 |
| 5th | CON PN | PN - 1 | PN 13 12 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1932 1st | CON PN | PN + 1 | CON 10 8 |
| 2nd | PN CON | MLP + 1 | MLP 1 2 |
| 4th | MLP PN | CON - 2 | *PN 21 22 |
| 6th | PN CON | | |
| 8th | PN CON | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1947 1st | MLP DAP | MLP + 3 | *MLP 24 27 |
| 5th | MLP PN | GOZ + 1 | PN 7 7 |
| 6th | MLP DAP | DAP - 3 | JON 2 1 |
| 7th | PN DAP | JON - 1 | DAP 4 1 |
| 8th | GOZO JON | | GOZ 3 4 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1950 2nd | PN MWP | PN + 3 | CON 4 3 |
| 4th | PN MLP | DAP + 1 | MLP 11 11 |
| 5th | MLP MWP | MWP - 3 | *PN 12 15 |
| 6th | DAP MWP | CON - 1 | DAP 1 2 |
| 7th | PN MWP | | MWP 11 8 |
| 8th | MWP CON | | GOZ 0 0 |
| | | | Ind. 1 1 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1951 1st | PN MLP | PN + 1 | CON 4 1 |
| 4th | MWP CON | MWP + 1 | MLP 14 13 |
| 5th | PN MLP | IND + 1 | *PN 15 16 |
| 7th | MLP CON | JON + 1 | *MWP 7 8 |
| 8th | Ind. PN | CON - 3 | JON 0 0 |
| 8th | JON CON | MLP - 1 | Ind. 0 1 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1953 2nd | MWP PN | MWP + 1 | MLP 19 20 |
| 2nd | MWP PN | MLP + 1 | *PN 18 16 |
| 5th | MLP PN | PN - 2 | MWP 3 4 |
| 7th | PN MWP | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1955 1st | PN MLP | No change | *MLP 23 23 |
| 5th | MLP PN | | PN 17 17 |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1962 1st | PN MLP | PN + 5 | DNP 4 3 |
| 2nd | CWP PN | MLP - 4 | MLP 16 12 |
| 3rd | PN CWP | DNP - 1 | *PN 25 30 |
| 5th | PN MLP | | PCP 1 1 |
| 7th | PN MLP | | CWP 4 4 |
| 8th | PN MLP | | |
| 10th | PN DNP | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1966 5th | MLP PN | No change | MLP 22 22 |
| 7th | PN MLP | | *PN 28 28 |
| 8th | MLP PN | | |
| 10th | PN MLP | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1971 4th | MLP PN | MLP + 1 | *MLP 28 29 |
| 7th | MLP PN | PN - 1 | PN 27 26 |
| 10th | PN MLP | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1976 1st | PN MLP | PN + 2 | *MLP 34 32 |
| 2nd | PN MLP | MLP - 2 | PN 31 33 |
| 7th | PN MLP | | |
| 11th | MLP PN | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1981 1st | PN MLP | PN + 1 | *MLP 34 33 |
| 2nd | PN MLP | MLP - 1 | PN 31 32 |
| 8th | MLP PN | | |
| 11th | PN MLP | | |
| 13th | MLP PN | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1987 2nd | PN MLP | PN + 2 | MLP 34 32 |
| 8th | MLP PN | MLP - 2 | *PN 31 33 |
| 9th | PN MLP | | |
| 10th | PN MLP | | [4 bonus seats for PN]
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1992 1st | PN MLP | PN + 3 | MLP 31 28 |
| 2nd | PN MLP | MLP - 3 | *PN 34 37 |
| 3rd | PN MLP | | |
| 7th | PN MLP | | |
| 8th | MLP PM | | |
| 10th | PN MLP | | |
| 11th | MLP PN | | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1996 1st | PN MLP | No change | *MLP 31 31 |
| 3rd | PN MLP | | PN 34 34 |
| 6th | PN MLP | | |
| 7th | MLP PN | | |
| 9th | MLP PN | | |
| 11th | MLP PN | | [4 bonus seats for MLP]
+--------------------------------------------------------+
|1998 1st | PN MLP | PN + 1 | MLP 30 29 |
| 3rd | PN MLP | MLP - 1 | *PN 35 36 |
| 11th | MLP PN | |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
Table 5: List of Leading Candidates Who Failed to Win
Election
and the Candidates Who Prevailed Over Them
Note: "Q-Share" refers to the candidates' first-preference votes as a percentage of the quota.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Elected Despite a Lower Share | Not Elected, Yet Had a Higher Share
| of First-Preference Votes | of First-Preference Votes
---------|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------
Year Dist| Name Party Q-Share| Name Party Q-Share
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1921 2 | Said, Emmanuele UPM 33.13 | Galea, Lewis LP 39.38
1921 3 | Buttigieg, Filippo NicoloUPM 52.72 | Agius, Arcangelo CON 59.01
1921 5 | Busuttil, Vincenzo LP 59.97 | Mizzi, Lewis F. CON 60.84
1921 6 | Salomone, Walter CON 4.23 | Tua, Giacinto LP 30.07
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1924 1 | Mallia, Carlo DNP 39.68 | Adami, Giovanni UPM 42.63
1924 2 | Farrugia, Vincenzo LP 41.02 | Mizzi, Bertu UPM 45.80
1924 6 | Zammit Hammet, Salvatore LP 36.61 | Bugeja, John CON 59.02
1924 8 | Micallef, Giuseppi CON 6.43 | Azzopardi, Giuseppi DNP 23.01
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1927 3 | Sacco, Enrico LP 51.62 | Muscat, Joseph CON 61.31
1927 4 | Dundon, Michael LP 36.08 | Strickland, Gerald CON 63.82
1927 5 | Cachia Zammit, Alfredo PN 36.52 | Mifsud, Armand CON 61.14
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1932 1 | Hyzler, Joseph PN 67.12 | Gera de Petri, Alfred CON 79.03
1932 2 | Galea, R. V. CON 58.66 | Azzopardi, Alfredo PN 60.22
1932 4 | Hamilton, Robert E. CON 51.66 | Boffa, Pawlu LP 62.29
1932 6 | Bugeja, John CON 59.79 | Zammit Hammet, SalvatorePN 79.85
1932 8 | Strickland, Roger CON 60.53 | Ruggier, Ruggiero PN 62.04
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1947 1 | Hyzler, Joseph DAP 34.45 | Bencini, Robert MLP 65.83
1947 2 | Laiviera, Nestu MLP 50.29 | Raimondo, John MLP 55.85
1947 3 | Cole, Johnny MLP 40.72 | Dalli, Ganni MLP 52.67
1947 5 | Frendo Azzopardi, John PN 33.51 | Puglisevich, Giuseppi MLP 45.73
1947 6 | Hyzler, Albert V. DAP 46.50 | Schembri Adami, Godfrey MLP 57.50
1947 7 | Apap Bologna, Filippo DAP 33.69 | Zammit, Giuseppe MLP 48.35
1947 7 | Scicluna, Peter Paul MLP 41.14 | Vella, Francis E. PN 41.36
1947 8 | Camilleri, Francesco JON 1.71 | Cauchi, Guzeppi GOZ 70.66
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1950 2 | Boffa, Anglu MWP 29.71 | Paris, Antonio PN 33.04
1950 4 | Abela, Joseph F. MLP 32.15 | Saliba, Philip PN 42.85
1950 5 | Galea, R.V. CON 42.01 | Scerri, Vincent CON 44.64
1950 5 | Colombo, Arthur F. MWP 28.83 | Ellul Mercer, J. MLP 42.43
1950 6 | Schembri, Joseph MWP 36.31 | Hyzler, Bertu DAP 61.54
1950 7 | Grech, Pawlu MWP 40.94 | Sammut, Gius. PN 52.24
1950 8 | De Trafford Strickland,C.CON 27.65 | Cefai, Giuseppi MWP 54.79
---------|------------------------------------------|----------------------------------
1951 1 | Attard Bezzina, Fanny MLP 30.84 | Pace, Paolo PN 42.01
1951 2 | Cassar Galea, Joseph F. PN 31.03 | Paris, Antonio PN 46.94
1951 4 | Strickland, Mabel CON 44.97 | Cole, Johnny MWP 51.58
1951 5 | Bonaci, Cikku MLP 27.64 | Rizzo, Oscar PN 46.96
1951 7 | Attard Montalto, GiuseppeCON 33.64 | Pulis, Mike MLP 43.07
1951 8 | De Trafford Strickland,C.CON 39.95 | Zammit Haber, Giovanni Ind 57.89
1951 8 | Cauchi, Amabile PN 47.95 | Jones, Henry JON 49.30
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1953 2 | Paris, Antonio PN 35.87 | Piscopo, Daniel MLP 51.03
1953 2 | Caruana, Carmelo PN 28.49 | Boffa, Anglu MWP 36.98
1953 5 | Borg Olivier, Gaetano PN 45.82 | Decesare, Maurice MLP 54.65
1953 7 | Flores, Joseph MLP 39.85 | Vella, Ganni MLP 42.31
1953 7 | Bezzina Wettinger, F. MWP 25.01 | Schembri, Carmelo PN 58.12
1953 8 | Debrincat, Lorenzo MLP 30.96 | Cefai, Guzeppi MLP 41.26
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1955 1 | Bonaci, Cikku MLP 26.72 | Pace, Paolo PN 53.53
1955 3 | Borg, George MLP 73.03 | Attard Bezzina, Emanuel MLP 76.95
1955 5 | Felice, Giovanni PN 52.17 | Bonaci, Cikku MLP 67.55
1955 6 | Caruana Demajo, Tom PN 59.83 | Schembri Adami, Godfrey PN 64.31
1955 7 | Flores, Joseph MLP 37.51 | Vella, Ganni MLP 54.55
1955 8 | Mizzi, Marcell MLP 33.57 | Zammit Haber, John Elia MLP 46.19
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1962 1 | Holland, Patrick MLP 15.82 | Pace, Poalo PN 39.24
1962 2 | Catania, Espedito PN 26.14 | Saliba, Joseph CWP 43.64
1962 3 | Camilleri, Emilio CWP 34.84 | Caruana, Carmelo PN 44.45
1962 5 | Muscat, Filippo MLP 37.47 | Pisani, Nazareno PN 72.90
1962 6 | Pulis, Mike MLP 43.92 | Agius, Calcidon MLP 46.04
1962 6 | Agius, Emanuele PN 43.63 | Fenech, Albert J. PN 51.38
1962 7 | Holland, Patrick MLP 34.61 | Tabone, Vincent PN 37.40
1962 8 | Hyzler, Albert Victor MLP 30.95 | Schembri Adami, Godfrey PN 54.60
1962 9 | Abela, Salvatore PN 40.62 | Borg Olivier, Giorgio PN 51.38
1962 10 | Attard, Coronato DNP 32.44 | Cauchi, Amabile PN 41.09
---------|------------------------------------------|----------------------------------
1966 3 | Caruana, Carmelo PN 36.68 | Borg Olivier De Puget,A.PN 37.99
1966 5 | Borg Olivier De Puget, A.PN 56.08 | Hyzler, Albert V. MLP 59.75
1966 6 | Dingli, Frans PN 49.61 | Fenech Adami, Eddie PN 52.28
1966 7 | Baldacchino, Joseph M. MLP 35.39 | Refalo, Michael A. PN 49.23
1966 8 | Camilleri, Gius. Maria PN 29.56 | Zammit, Karmnu MLP 40.06
1966 10 | Galea, Kelinu MLP 28.30 | Busuttil, John PN 33.69
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1971 2 | Laiviera, Nestu MLP 24.90 | Azzopardi, John MLP 29.63
1971 3 | Borg Olivier De Puget, A.PN 43.39 | Cassar, Joseph PN 45.23
1971 4 | Caruana, Carmelo PN 66.60 | Attard Bezzina, EmmanuelMLP 77.23
1971 5 | Borg Olivier De Puget, A.PN 49.52 | Farrugia, Giuseppe PN 51.07
1971 7 | Bonello Du Puis, George PN 48.19 | Privitera, Salvinu MLP 65.04
1971 8 | Buttigieg, John MLP 27.54 | Naudi, Robert MLP 58.32
1971 8 | Camilleri, Giuseppe MariaPN 38.88 | Rizzo Naudi, John PN 47.15
1971 9 | Gatt, Lawrence PN 58.93 | Abela, Sammy PN 68.17
1971 10 | Camilleri, Angelo MLP 43.48 | Refalo, Carmel PN 55.95
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1976 1 | Cremona, Danny MLP 9.92 | De Marco, Guido PN 24.13
1976 2 | Piscopo, Daniel MLP 25.87 | Saliba, Joseph MLP 28.56
1976 2 | Brincat, Joseph MLP 8.64 | Muscat, Josie PN 58.39
1976 4 | Farrugia, Jimmy PN 48.28 | Cassar Galea, Joseph F. PN 49.73
1976 6 | Camilleri, Gius. Maria PN 51.27 | Saliba, Philip PN 69.82
1976 7 | Buttigieg, John MLP 42.84 | Farrugia, Herman PN 56.04
1976 11 | Abela, Sammy (Salvatore) PN 57.01 | Xuereb, Paul MLP 64.99
1976 12 | Chetcuti Caruana, Paul MLP 42.10 | Agius, Calcidon MLP 46.20
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1981 1 | Cremona, Danny MLP 5.13 | Delicata, Charles PN 13.58
1981 2 | Bartolo, Freddie MLP 9.20 | Saliba, Joseph MLP 10.29
1981 2 | Grima, Joseph (Joe) MLP 7.03 | Muscat, Josie (Joseph) PN 74.32
1981 8 | Fenech, Joseph PN 21.15 | Bonaci, Evelyn MLP 47.03
1981 9 | Falzon, Michael PN 50.41 | Rizzo Naudi, John PN 64.20
1981 10 | Tabone, Censu PN 52.50 | Vella, John PN 58.71
1981 11 | Micallef, Alfred MLP 35.95 | Portelli, Frank PN 47.71
1981 13 | Attard, Coronato PN 51.70 | Debattista, Carmel MLP 53.48
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1987 1 | Grima, Joe MLP 6.58 | Farrugia, Herman PN 35.31
1987 1 | Brincat, Joseph MLP 2.54 | Mifsud Bonnici, Antoine PN 15.53
1987 2 | Mizzi, Joe MLP 25.84 | Borda, Manuel PN 33.41
1987 3 | Portelli, Alfred (FreddieMLP 50.75 | Vella, George MLP 53.73
1987 5 | Calleja, Reno MLP 30.30 | Pace, Bertu MLP 38.89
1987 7 | Mangion, Charles MLP 13.35 | Cuschieri, Louis PN 24.32
1987 7 | Debono Grech, Joe MLP 4.88 | Chircop, Joseph (Joe) PN 15.85
1987 8 | Gauchi Borda, Lino PN 8.35 | Sant, Alfred MLP 16.80
1987 9 | Brincat, Leo MLP 48.84 | Falzon, Michael PN 52.90
1987 10| Brincat, Leo MLP 33.06 | Vella, John PN 62.86
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1992 1 | Debono Grech, Joe MLP 1.20 | Farrugia, Jean Pierre PN 7.34
1992 2 | Grech, Edwin Saviour MLP 12.78 | Borda, Manuel PN 64.62
1992 3 | Portelli, Alfred (FreddieMLP 40.20 | Agius Muscat, Renato PN 54.92
1992 5 | Calleja, Reno MLP 39.13 | Dalli, John MLP 39.83
1992 7 | Buhagiar, Charles MLP 31.35 | Zammit, Ninu (Anthony) PN 46.33
1992 8 | Gauci Borda, Lino (CarmelPN 19.31 | Sant, Carmen MLP 41.38
1992 9 | Brincat, Leo MLP 49.28 | Vassallo, Adrian MLP 50.94
1992 10 | Bartolo, Evarist (Varist)MLP 52.45 | Rizzo Naudi, John PN 54.14
1992 11 | Gatt, Lawrence PN 29.80 | Gatt, George MLP 61.10
1992 11 | Falzon, Michael PN 25.40 | Deguara, Louis PN 34.11
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1996 1 | Schembri Adami, Sandro MLP 4.75 | Farrugia, Jean Pierre PN 44.27
1996 2 | Agius, Christopher MLP 31.20 | Borda, Manuel PN 56.04
1996 2 | Grech, Edwin MLP 14.15 | Dalli, John PN 46.44
1996 3 | Dalli, Helena MLP 35.90 | Galea, Mario PN 47.58
1996 4 | Chircop, Karl MLP 37.21 | Mifsud, Joe MLP 41.29
1996 6 | Attard Montalto, John MLP 55.01 | Mifsud Bonnici, Antoine PN 58.20
1996 7 | Pullicino Orlando, JeffrePN 44.42 | Gulia, Gavin MLP 53.51
1996 8 | Bonnici, Josef PN 8.01 | Delicata, Marselle PN 8.97
1996 9 | Vella, John PN 44.66 | Grech, Edwin MLP 51.77
1996 11 | Bonnici, Josef PN 14.15 | Micallef, Alfred MLP 42.08
1996 13 | Galea Pace, Victor PN 36.86 | Refalo, Louis PN 46.92
---------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
1998 1 | Herrera, Jose MLP 6.83 | Gatt, Austin PN 42.08
1998 2 | Law, Rita MLP 25.40 | Perici, Stephen MLP 44.19
1998 3 | Abela, Carmelo MLP 27.75 | Psaila Savona, Joseph PN 63.14
1998 7 | Attard Montalto, John MLP 49.04 | Pace, Albert MLP 53.76
1998 8 | Bonnici, Josef PN 4.90 | Fenech, Mark PN 8.97
1998 11 | Vassallo, Edwin PN 22.91 | Micallef, Freddie MLP 29.93
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------