Decimals There is an inconsistency in Schedule Eight. In the definition of the quota in Part I Section 3 it states that the “quota is determined by dividing the total number of votes […] by the number of seats […]. There is no mention of rounding. However, in the examples of Parts II, III and IV in Section 4 it is said that the quota is determined by “dividing the total number of votes cast for the participating parties by the number six [or ten] (the number of seats) with any fraction obtained being disregarded.” It is hard to see why that has been added. First of all the examples do not follow the rules as described and one may be in doubt about what the law states. Secondly, by rounding here there is a realistic risk that there may be ties (equal number of unallocated votes) from time to time, a risk which is negligible if decimals are used in all calculations.46 Rounding the quota does not add anything to simplicity or clarity. If it were to serve a purpose one should rather state with how many significant digits the remainder (or the “unallocated votes”) should be calculated with. The quota is just one part of a product determining the remainders, which are the numbers significant for the distribution of seats. However, regular computers have enough precision for this not to be a problem, and if needed the calculation may be done even by hand to the necessary accuracy to determine the highest remainder. Since there is a chance that ties occur in the remainders, in particular when the quota is rounded, there needs to be a rule for breaking the ties. Such a rule has not been included in the act. 46 This actually happened in a municipality in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1997. 66