1164:, the same principles are followed, with the following differences: only parties that have received more than 3 percent of the vote in the county are able to participate in the distribution of seats. There is no 12 percent clause or other possibility for parties that fall below this threshold to gain seats. Finally, the number of adjustment seats is one tenth of the number of seats in the county council. If one tenth is a fractional number (which it always is, since the number of seats in a county council is required to be odd), the fraction is always adjusted upwards, so a county council with 51 seats would have 45 fixed seats and 6 adjustment seats.
924:
59:
899:
1261:
shows a party with "too many" seats. In 2009, the first ideal distribution showed that the Labour Party should have 63 seats overall, but they had already won 64. Those seats were taken out of consideration, and so another ideal distribution of the remaining 103 seats was made between the
Progress Party, the Conservative Party, the Christian Democrats, the Centre Party and the Socialist Left Party.
1152:
seat. If a party is yet to receive a seat in the district, its quotient simply is the number of votes it received. When the fixed seats were distributed among the parties in the district, this number was divided by 1.4, which made it harder for a party to achieve its first seat. Now, however, no such division takes place. The method used is thus pure and not modified Sainte-Laguë.
911:
1061:(which are not treated as an integral part of the Danish election system). The leveling seats are supplementary to the normal seats which are allocated by proportional votes within each county. All parties which achieve at least 2% of the national votes are granted as many leveling seats as required to achieve proportional representation at the national level.
1132:
have been awarded fixed seats in districts where they have had more than 12 percent of the vote are disregarded, and their seats are subtracted from the calculation. If a party has received 2 seats in this fashion, for example, the calculation will be made with 347 seats. Again the modified Sainte-Laguë method is used.
1260:
If a party already has won more seats than the ideal distribution indicates, the party keeps those seats, but will not win any leveling seats. In that case, another ideal distribution is made between the parties still eligible for leveling seats, this may be repeated if the revised distribution again
1131:
In the second stage, the 349 seats are distributed through a calculation based on the total number of votes summed up across the entire country. In this distribution only parties that have received more than 4 percent of the national vote are included. Parties that fall below 4 percent nationally but
1203:
The remaining 19 representatives are allocated one to each county but are elected based on nationwide results for a party, as long as the popular vote at the national level for that party exceeds the exclusion threshold of 4%. The result is that each representative represents an approximately equal
1256:
for the eligible parties. If a party that did not reach the electoral threshold won seats anyway, the party keeps those seats and the number of seats to distribute is reduced accordingly. In 2009 the
Liberal party failed to reach the threshold but won two seats. Therefore, only 167 seats were taken
1285:
The first leveling seat goes to the county and party corresponding to the highest fraction in the table. The second leveling seat goes to county and party corresponding the next highest fraction in the table, and so on. Each time a leveling seat has been determined, the remaining fractions for the
1277:
For each county and eligible party, determine the first unused quotient when the regular district seats were distributed. If the party has not yet won a seat from that county, the quotient is equal to the number of votes the party received there. If the party already has won one mandate from that
1151:
is the number of seats it has been awarded. The district where the party has the highest quotient is awarded an adjustment seat, and a new quotient is then calculated for that district, before the next adjustment seat is distributed. In theory, a district can thus receive more than one adjustment
1135:
In the third stage, a summary is made of the fixed seats that the parties have achieved, and this is compared to the outcome of the nationwide distribution above. If a party has received more fixed seats than its share of the total 349-seat distribution, district seats allocated to that party are
1048:
In 1915, Denmark became one of the first countries in the world to introduce leveling seats in their parliamentary elections. Since then, all parliamentary elections in
Denmark have allocated these adjustment seats as a substantial fraction of the seats in the parliament. The parliamentary seats
1303:
In the 2009 election, a programming fault in the software calculating the allocation prognosis for one county made their leveling seat go to another party. That changed the outcome in two other counties, and it took over a week and a recount until the distribution of leveling seats was finally
1295:
The method for assigning leveling seats usually results in the first leveling seats being given to candidates that did fairly well in the county. However, the last leveling seats may be awarded to candidates that received few votes in the county that they will represent. (In theory it is even
1286:
county that gave its leveling seat are taken out of consideration. Once a party has received all the leveling seats that it is entitled to, the remaining fractions for that party are also taken out of consideration. This process continues until all 19 leveling seats have been distributed.
1296:
possible for a party to receive a leveling seat in a county where they received no votes, or even in a county where they did not field any candidates, a scenario that the election law has no contingency for.) An illustration of this came in 2005 when
1281:
The quotients for each county and party are divided by the total number of votes for all parties in that county and multiplied by the number of regular non-leveling seats allocated to that county. This leaves a table of fractions for each county and
1188:
In order to be eligible for leveling seats, a party must get at least 4% (the exclusion threshold) of the national popular vote. A party may attain enough votes in a given county to elect a representative but may fail to be eligible for leveling
1128:) with the first divisor adjusted to 1.2 (1.4 in elections before 2018). Only parties that have received at least 4 percent of the vote nationally or 12 percent of the vote within the district can participate in this distribution of seats.
1136:
retracted and given to the party with the second 'highest quotient'. The parties are then awarded a number of adjustment seats sufficient to cover the gap between their number of fixed seats and their share in the nationwide distribution.
1036:. Leveling seats are seats of additional members elected to supplement the members directly elected by each constituency. The purpose of these additional seats is to ensure that each party's share of the total seats is roughly
1199:
Of 169 representatives, 150 are elected by popular vote within the county. This means that a party that achieves 40% of the popular vote in a county will send about 40% of the total number of representatives from that
1264:
Once a final ideal distribution has been settled, the number of leveling seats awarded to each party is equal to that party's ideal number of seats minus the number of seats already won from each county.
1278:
seat, the quotient is the number of votes received in that county divided by 3, if the party has already won two seats from the county, the quotient is the number of votes divided by 5, and so on.
1139:
Finally, the adjustment seats that each party has received are distributed among the districts. The application of the Sainte-Laguë number gives each party a quotient ('comparison number',
1085:, for parties having qualified with a total share of votes above a 4%-limit in parliamentary elections and 3%-limit in county council elections. Sweden did not use leveling seats for
1243:
The allocation of leveling seats is a fairly complex process. First the leveling seats are distributed among the parties. The second part is distributing them among the counties.
952:
1300:
of the
Liberal Party received the last leveling seat, in Finnmark, with 826 votes. Thus, the Liberal party gained 20% of Finnmark's seats with about 2% of the vote there.
1089:
elections prior to 2018. With the new election law (effective from the election 2018), leveling seats are used in municipalities with more than one electoral district.
1567:
1320:
which demanded a reform of the electoral law for proportional representation, Germany added a provision to create national leveling seats as needed in a case of
643:
1192:
The number of representatives elected per county is a function of the total population in the county and the area of the county. Hence, the county of
1347:
675:
537:
532:
945:
638:
1378:
320:
1177:
1173:
844:
95:
1213:
1208:
In the 2005 elections, the average number of votes on a national level was largely similar across party lines. The largest party, the
938:
839:
1325:
829:
579:
550:
490:
561:
86:
624:
1121:
1562:
1229:
266:
251:
236:
1096:, 310 are fixed seats and 39 are adjustment seats. The 310 fixed seats are distributed among the 29 electoral districts (
1557:
1552:
1342:
1317:
882:
502:
425:
346:
1037:
314:
296:
137:
867:
1366:
758:
741:
708:
688:
472:
460:
430:
231:
189:
122:
566:
1161:
1082:
1069:
Leveling seats have been a part of the election procedures for all
Icelandic parliamentary elections since 1934.
614:
607:
91:
1235:
The arrangement has gone through several adjustments through the years and is the result of legislative action.
1528:
1337:
1105:
1086:
668:
596:
585:
448:
435:
418:
395:
373:
336:
326:
1516:
1405:"Apportionment of Seats to Althingi, the Icelandic Parliament: Analysis of the Elections 2003 + 2007 + 2009"
794:
648:
331:
1273:
To determine the county that each party will receive its leveling seats in, the following process is done:
1253:
1209:
823:
703:
633:
440:
1212:, required the fewest votes per representative with 14,139; the party that needed the most votes was the
1432:
1404:
731:
571:
455:
261:
240:
172:
150:
923:
789:
1321:
862:
849:
817:
81:
1120:
In the first stage, the fixed seats are distributed within each district according to the modified
768:
602:
255:
1196:
needs fewer votes to elect a representative (7,409 in 2005) than Oslo (18,167 the same election).
993:
985:
928:
799:
410:
194:
877:
1328:, in addition to the traditional leveling seats that already existed in many state elections.
1305:
834:
804:
726:
663:
497:
224:
199:
182:
50:
1495:
1297:
1221:
1217:
1097:
1029:
1013:
977:
915:
872:
763:
751:
465:
341:
167:
161:
143:
132:
127:
115:
76:
38:
1001:
969:
903:
736:
591:
556:
477:
388:
291:
214:
156:
34:
58:
1050:
773:
713:
698:
509:
378:
353:
204:
1216:, with 16,262. On a county by county basis, however, there were greater disparities:
898:
1546:
1054:
782:
482:
270:
108:
71:
46:
1449:
522:
286:
279:
209:
1112:. The distribution of seats between the parties then takes place in four stages.
400:
358:
301:
246:
1143:) in each district, which is its number of votes in the district divided by (2
1109:
17:
1049:
currently comprise 135 county seats and 40 leveling seats, with a further 4 "
1058:
1025:
368:
363:
1252:
A nationwide "ideal" distribution of all 169 seats is calculated using the
1024:
also introduced national leveling seats for their national parliament, the
910:
1532:
1225:
1193:
1077:
Since 1970, Sweden has used leveling seats in its elections for both the
619:
1093:
1078:
1021:
1017:
405:
1472:
1181:
1428:
1053:
seats" elected separately by proportional representation in the
1040:
to the party's overall shares of votes at the national level.
1220:
needed only 3,503 votes to elect one representative from the
57:
1012:, are an election mechanism employed for many years by all
1410:. The National Electoral Commission of Iceland. April 2010
1184:. Its current form is based on the following principles:
1020:) in elections for their national legislatures. In 2013,
1228:needed 22,555 to elect one representative from the
1032:removed the leveling seats, and replaced them with
1529:"Bundestag: Deutschland hat ein neues Wahlrecht"
1172:Leveling seats were introduced in Norway in the
27:Tool used to make legislatures more proportional
1367:Germany passes law to shrink its XXL parliament
1180:, there are 19 leveling mandates, one for each
1316:In February 2013, following a decision of the
946:
8:
953:
939:
29:
1348:Mixed-member proportional representation
1257:into account for the ideal distribution.
1385:(in Danish). Gyldendal. 2 February 2009
1359:
45:
1568:Party-list proportional representation
7:
1176:when there were 8 such seats. Since
1496:"Slik fungerer utjevningsmandatene"
1030:electoral reform in Germany in 2023
25:
1494:Sved, Børge (9 September 2009).
1326:mixed member proportional system
922:
909:
897:
845:McKelvey–Schofield chaos theorem
491:Semi-proportional representation
123:First preference plurality (FPP)
883:Harsanyi's utilitarian theorem
840:Moulin's impossibility theorem
805:Conflicting majorities paradox
1:
1517:No counting error in Rogaland
1498:(in Norwegian). Adresseavisen
709:Frustrated majorities paradox
1383:Den Store Danske Encyklopædi
1343:Biproportional apportionment
1318:Federal Constitutional Court
1239:Allocation of leveling seats
878:Condorcet dominance theorems
818:Social and collective choice
1174:1989 parliamentary election
544:By mechanism of combination
315:Proportional representation
1584:
1473:"Den norske valgordningen"
1450:"Den norske valgordningen"
1436:, retrieved 13 April 2013
1008:), commonly known also as
742:Multiple districts paradox
473:Fractional approval voting
461:Interactive representation
1269:Allocating among counties
689:Paradoxes and pathologies
538:Mixed-member proportional
533:Mixed-member majoritarian
528:By results of combination
419:Approval-based committees
1338:Additional Member System
1247:Allocation among parties
1116:Leveling seat allocation
1106:largest remainder method
1092:Of the 349 seats in the
868:Condorcet's jury theorem
669:Double simultaneous vote
644:Rural–urban proportional
639:Dual-member proportional
601:
590:
557:Parallel (superposition)
449:Fractional social choice
436:Expanding approvals rule
265:
250:
235:
166:
155:
131:
1126:jämkade uddatalsmetoden
795:Tyranny of the majority
572:Fusion (majority bonus)
389:Quota-remainder methods
1210:Norwegian Labour Party
1101:
1005:
997:
989:
981:
973:
929:Mathematics portal
835:Majority impossibility
824:Impossibility theorems
620:Negative vote transfer
441:Method of equal shares
62:
1433:Store norske leksikon
732:Best-is-worst paradox
721:Pathological response
456:Direct representation
109:Single-winner methods
61:
1563:Elections in Denmark
1322:negative vote weight
1308:got the final seat.
1230:Socialist Left Party
1160:In elections to the
916:Economics portal
863:Median voter theorem
82:Comparative politics
1558:Elections in Sweden
1553:Elections in Norway
1254:Sainte-Laguë method
1214:Christian Democrats
1122:Sainte-Laguë method
1104:) according to the
1034:Zweitstimmendeckung
904:Politics portal
615:Vote linkage system
586:Seat linkage system
173:Ranked-choice (RCV)
1471:Seierstad, Taral.
1429:utjevningsmandater
1156:In local elections
1016:countries (except
990:utjevningsmandater
800:Discursive dilemma
759:Lesser evil voting
634:Supermixed systems
337:Largest remainders
195:Round-robin voting
63:
1379:"Tillægsmandater"
1324:occurring in its
1306:Mette Hanekamhaug
1204:number of voters.
963:
962:
850:Gibbard's theorem
790:Dominance paradox
727:Perverse response
431:Phragmen's method
297:Majority judgment
225:Positional voting
183:Condorcet methods
51:electoral systems
16:(Redirected from
1575:
1537:
1536:
1525:
1519:
1514:
1508:
1507:
1505:
1503:
1491:
1485:
1484:
1482:
1480:
1468:
1462:
1461:
1459:
1457:
1446:
1440:
1439:
1426:
1420:
1419:
1417:
1415:
1409:
1401:
1395:
1394:
1392:
1390:
1375:
1369:
1364:
1218:Sogn og Fjordane
1010:adjustment seats
1006:Ausgleichsmandat
982:utjämningsmandat
955:
948:
941:
927:
926:
914:
913:
902:
901:
857:Positive results
752:Strategic voting
649:Majority jackpot
606:
595:
466:Liquid democracy
342:National remnant
332:Highest averages
269:
254:
239:
171:
162:Alternative vote
160:
144:Partisan primary
136:
77:Mechanism design
30:
21:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1527:
1526:
1522:
1515:
1511:
1501:
1499:
1493:
1492:
1488:
1478:
1476:
1470:
1469:
1465:
1455:
1453:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1437:
1427:
1423:
1413:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1402:
1398:
1388:
1386:
1377:
1376:
1372:
1365:
1361:
1356:
1334:
1314:
1293:
1271:
1249:
1241:
1170:
1162:county councils
1158:
1118:
1083:county councils
1075:
1067:
1046:
959:
921:
920:
908:
896:
888:
887:
854:
830:Arrow's theorem
820:
810:
809:
778:
748:
737:No-show paradox
718:
704:Cloning paradox
694:Spoiler effects
691:
681:
680:
655:
542:
525:
515:
514:
487:
478:Maximal lottery
445:
426:Thiele's method
415:
385:
317:
307:
306:
292:Approval voting
280:Cardinal voting
276:
221:
215:Maximal lottery
179:
111:
101:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1581:
1579:
1571:
1570:
1565:
1560:
1555:
1545:
1544:
1539:
1538:
1520:
1509:
1486:
1475:(in Norwegian)
1463:
1452:(in Norwegian)
1441:
1438:(in Norwegian)
1421:
1396:
1370:
1358:
1357:
1355:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1345:
1340:
1333:
1330:
1313:
1310:
1292:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1270:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1262:
1258:
1248:
1245:
1240:
1237:
1206:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1190:
1169:
1166:
1157:
1154:
1117:
1114:
1074:
1071:
1066:
1063:
1051:North Atlantic
1045:
1042:
966:Leveling seats
961:
960:
958:
957:
950:
943:
935:
932:
931:
919:
918:
906:
893:
890:
889:
886:
885:
880:
875:
870:
865:
853:
852:
847:
842:
837:
832:
821:
816:
815:
812:
811:
808:
807:
802:
797:
792:
777:
776:
774:Turkey-raising
771:
766:
761:
747:
746:
745:
744:
734:
729:
717:
716:
714:Center squeeze
711:
706:
701:
699:Spoiler effect
692:
687:
686:
683:
682:
679:
678:
673:
672:
671:
658:By ballot type
654:
653:
652:
651:
646:
641:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
622:
612:
611:
610:
599:
576:
575:
574:
569:
564:
559:
541:
540:
535:
526:
521:
520:
517:
516:
513:
512:
510:Limited voting
507:
506:
505:
486:
485:
480:
475:
470:
469:
468:
463:
444:
443:
438:
433:
428:
414:
413:
408:
403:
398:
384:
383:
382:
381:
379:Localized list
376:
371:
366:
361:
351:
350:
349:
347:Biproportional
344:
339:
334:
318:
313:
312:
309:
308:
305:
304:
299:
294:
289:
275:
274:
259:
244:
220:
219:
218:
217:
212:
207:
202:
192:
178:
177:
176:
175:
164:
151:Instant-runoff
148:
147:
146:
138:Jungle primary
125:
114:Single vote -
112:
107:
106:
103:
102:
100:
99:
89:
84:
79:
74:
68:
65:
64:
54:
53:
43:
42:
26:
24:
18:Leveling seats
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1580:
1569:
1566:
1564:
1561:
1559:
1556:
1554:
1551:
1550:
1548:
1535:. 2013-02-22.
1534:
1531:(in German).
1530:
1524:
1521:
1518:
1513:
1510:
1497:
1490:
1487:
1474:
1467:
1464:
1451:
1445:
1442:
1435:
1434:
1430:
1425:
1422:
1406:
1400:
1397:
1384:
1380:
1374:
1371:
1368:
1363:
1360:
1353:
1349:
1346:
1344:
1341:
1339:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1329:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1311:
1309:
1307:
1301:
1299:
1298:Vera Lysklætt
1291:Peculiarities
1290:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1268:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1250:
1246:
1244:
1238:
1236:
1233:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1222:Liberal Party
1219:
1215:
1211:
1202:
1198:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1167:
1165:
1163:
1155:
1153:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1141:jämförelsetal
1137:
1133:
1129:
1127:
1123:
1115:
1113:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1090:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1072:
1070:
1064:
1062:
1060:
1056:
1055:Faroe Islands
1052:
1043:
1041:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
987:
983:
979:
975:
974:tillægsmandat
971:
967:
956:
951:
949:
944:
942:
937:
936:
934:
933:
930:
925:
917:
912:
907:
905:
900:
895:
894:
892:
891:
884:
881:
879:
876:
874:
873:May's theorem
871:
869:
866:
864:
861:
860:
859:
858:
851:
848:
846:
843:
841:
838:
836:
833:
831:
828:
827:
826:
825:
819:
814:
813:
806:
803:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
788:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:majority rule
781:Paradoxes of
775:
772:
770:
767:
765:
762:
760:
757:
756:
755:
754:
753:
743:
740:
739:
738:
735:
733:
730:
728:
725:
724:
723:
722:
715:
712:
710:
707:
705:
702:
700:
697:
696:
695:
690:
685:
684:
677:
674:
670:
667:
666:
665:
662:
661:
660:
659:
650:
647:
645:
642:
640:
637:
636:
635:
632:
626:
623:
621:
618:
617:
616:
613:
609:
604:
600:
598:
593:
589:
588:
587:
584:
583:
582:
581:
577:
573:
570:
568:
565:
563:
560:
558:
555:
554:
553:
552:
547:
546:
545:
539:
536:
534:
531:
530:
529:
524:
523:Mixed systems
519:
518:
511:
508:
504:
501:
500:
499:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
484:
483:Random ballot
481:
479:
476:
474:
471:
467:
464:
462:
459:
458:
457:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
442:
439:
437:
434:
432:
429:
427:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
412:
409:
407:
404:
402:
399:
397:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
380:
377:
375:
372:
370:
367:
365:
362:
360:
357:
356:
355:
352:
348:
345:
343:
340:
338:
335:
333:
330:
329:
328:
327:Apportionment
325:
324:
323:
322:
316:
311:
310:
303:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
288:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
272:
268:
263:
262:Antiplurality
260:
257:
253:
248:
245:
242:
238:
233:
230:
229:
228:
227:
226:
216:
213:
211:
208:
206:
203:
201:
198:
197:
196:
193:
191:
190:Condorcet-IRV
188:
187:
186:
185:
184:
174:
169:
165:
163:
158:
154:
153:
152:
149:
145:
142:
141:
139:
134:
129:
126:
124:
121:
120:
119:
117:
110:
105:
104:
97:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
73:
72:Social choice
70:
69:
67:
66:
60:
56:
55:
52:
48:
47:Social choice
44:
40:
36:
32:
31:
19:
1523:
1512:
1502:22 September
1500:. Retrieved
1489:
1479:22 September
1477:. Retrieved
1466:
1454:. Retrieved
1444:
1431:
1424:
1412:. Retrieved
1399:
1387:. Retrieved
1382:
1373:
1362:
1315:
1302:
1294:
1272:
1242:
1234:
1207:
1171:
1159:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1138:
1134:
1130:
1125:
1119:
1091:
1076:
1068:
1047:
1038:proportional
1033:
1009:
998:jöfnunarsæti
965:
964:
856:
855:
822:
780:
779:
764:Exaggeration
750:
749:
720:
719:
693:
657:
656:
625:Mixed ballot
580:Compensatory
578:
551:compensatory
548:
543:
527:
489:
488:
447:
446:
417:
416:
387:
386:
374:List-free PR
319:
287:Score voting
278:
277:
223:
222:
210:Ranked pairs
181:
180:
113:
1456:9 September
1147:+1), where
664:Single vote
567:Conditional
562:Coexistence
411:Quota Borda
401:Schulze STV
359:Closed list
302:STAR voting
247:Borda count
1547:Categories
1354:References
1110:Hare quota
1102:valkretsar
769:Truncation
498:Cumulative
321:Party-list
96:By country
87:Comparison
1304:decided.
1108:with the
1087:municipal
1059:Greenland
1026:Bundestag
994:Icelandic
986:Norwegian
676:Dual-vote
369:Panachage
364:Open list
354:List type
232:Plurality
128:Two-round
116:plurality
39:Economics
1533:Die Zeit
1414:13 April
1389:13 April
1332:See also
1226:Akershus
1224:, while
1194:Finnmark
396:Hare STV
35:Politics
33:A joint
1312:Germany
1200:county.
1098:Swedish
1094:Riksdag
1079:Riksdag
1065:Iceland
1044:Denmark
1022:Germany
1018:Finland
978:Swedish
406:CPO-STV
256:Baldwin
205:Schulze
200:Minimax
118:methods
1282:party.
1189:seats.
1182:county
1168:Norway
1073:Sweden
1028:. The
1014:Nordic
1002:German
970:Danish
271:Coombs
41:series
1408:(PDF)
608:'MMP'
597:'AMS'
1504:2013
1481:2013
1458:2013
1416:2013
1391:2013
1178:2005
1081:and
1057:and
549:Non-
503:SNTV
92:List
49:and
37:and
267:el.
252:el.
241:IRV
237:el.
1549::
1381:.
1232:.
1100::
1004::
1000:,
996::
992:,
988::
984:,
980::
976:,
972::
603:NZ
592:UK
168:US
157:UK
140:)
133:US
1506:.
1483:.
1460:.
1418:.
1393:.
1149:n
1145:n
1124:(
968:(
954:e
947:t
940:v
605::
594::
273:)
264:(
258:)
249:(
243:)
234:(
170::
159::
135::
130:(
98:)
94:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
