2- Electoral Systems Flashcards
Example of gov from minority votes
2001 blair
Large labour majority- 413 seats
41% votes
Examples of pr systems being majority
2011- scottish parliamentary elections- ams- snp majority
2011- ams- welsh assembly elections- labour majority
Examples of coalition and minority gov under pr
-2007,2011,2016- northern ireland assembly elections- stv
All coaliution- DUP and Sinn Fein
Example of fptp not being proportional
2015 UKIP
Just under 4 mill votes- 12.5% votes cast- 3rd in terms of votes
One seat commons
Examples of safe seats
Huntingdonshire
Bristol west one of safest- labour
47,000 votes in 2017
9,000 votes for conservatives
Most marginal seats examples
2019
Kensington
Bedford
Bury north
Fptp example no votes and seats
Greens 2.7% votes, 1 seats- 0.2% seats
Lib dems 11.5% votes, 11 seats- 1.5% seats
What are the main functions of elections
-choose a respresentative- speak on behalf
-choose a government- confirm legitimacy o it
Leader of the largest party- invited to be pm
-hold the gov and mps to account
Electorate can renew decision, reject unpopular party each election
-some influence on policy
Major parties may be defeated so change decisions to re-think unpopular policies
Major parties may steal successful minority policies
Gives voice for minority gov
-participation in politics
Through voting, campaigning or running as candidate
Criteria to compare electoral systems
-provide voters w/ clear choice
-produce fair and representative outcome
-lead to strong, legit gov with clear mandate that can pass laws effectively and heldf account for actuons
-provide effective link between reps and constituencies
Reforming electorate- essay plans- main points
Implications on representation
Effect on voter choice
Impact on formation of gov
Impact of diff electoral systems on government
-AMS in scottish parliament and welsh assembly mroe coalitions and minorityes
-but relatively stable
-fptp not always majority
2017 minority- supply and confidence with dup
2010 coalition
Impact on parties and party systems- electoral systems
-more parties sucesfully competing in elections
-small extremist parties more likely
Example of smaller power gaining power with pr
2007 scottish parliament
Greens.2. Seats
But used for supply and confidence iwth snp
Sae w/ may w/ dup un 2017
Impact on voters and voter choice pr
-reduce wasted votes
-safe seats less likely
-increase in turnout not seen
Too complicated
Votes in disolved elections seen less important than general elections
Voter turnout pr vs fptp
Scottish local elections- highest ever 63.5% 2021
General election- 67.3%
Fptp
Simple pluraality voting system
Person with the most votes in constituency is elected
-place cross next to name prefered candidate
Largest no. Seats forms gov
Advantages fptp
-one party gov
Good working majority
Clear mandate
Stable-make decisions effectively
-strong mp-constitiuent links
Effective representation
Constituent surgeries
-extremist parties unlikely to be elected
-simple and speedy
68% voted in favour fptp over av in 2011
Disadvantages fptp
-dont need majority
Fewer than half mps secure majority of votes in constituency
-not proportional or representative
Geographical concentration needed
Esp against lib dems and greens
-‘safe seats’- reduce voter choice and decrease turnout
-‘marginal’- small majority of mp sitting
Campaign is focused there
Not all votes equal
Sv
Supplementary voting
Majoritarian 50+%
London mayor (every 4 y), pccs
2nd vote used when under 50%
Sv advantages
Strong mandate
Majoritarian 50+%
Greater support
Moderate campaigns- gain 2nd preference important
Simple
Help independant candidates
Sv disadvantages
-could win on 2nd vote even if most on 1st vote (as long as under 50% on first)
-not proportional
Irrelevant with mayoral elections as only one candiate
-if westminster- won majority seats but minority votes
Ams
Additional member system
Hybrid system
Used in elections in disolved bodies- scottish parliament, welsh assembly
Compromise as less radical
1st vote- mps
2nd vote- top up vote for party
Ams advantages
-more proportional- ‘top up
-retains strong mp-constituency link
-gives broadest choice to voters - to ‘split their ticket’
Same party on both or one on party and one on mep
-coalition more likely- compormise and coalition between oarties
-bote minor parties
2016- 6 seats to greens in scottish parliament
Ams disadvantages
-2 types members
1 -constituency with those duties
2- top up votes
-under closed list system (party_- party leadership ranking decides candidates rather than voters
-claim confusing for voters- spoilt ballots higher in scotland and wales
-minority or coalition gov - not as efficient
Stv
Single transferable vote
-proportinal voting system
-northern ireland and scotish council elections
Ni- broadest representation to reduce tensions if one party
-number choices prefertial
Less constituencies- 18 in ni
More than one rep per party per constituency
-candidate needs to achieve quota
Stv advantages
Proportional outcome
High voter choice- voters can vote for candidates diff parties and prefer between candidates same party
Fewer wasted votes
No safe seats- no need o tactical vote
More representative- multiple mps to talk to within constituency
-power struggles in ni- more proportional
Stv disadvantages
-complicated- confuses voters- increase spoilt ballots
Long time to reach result
-voter- rep weaker relatinship
-easier extremist parties
Choice- fptp
Limited choice
1 mp/constituency
1 mp/party
-no choice- safe seat, limited
Choice- sv
More choice than fptp as have 1st and 2nd preference
Choice0 ams
-gives choice mps and party
1st mp-local
2nd -party chooses mp
-more proportiopnal
Less wasted votes
To vote small party may increase turnout in elections
Choice- stv
-may have multiple mps per party
Larger constituencies- as many candidates as seats
Less wasted botes
To vote smaller oarty may increase turnout
Fair and representative outcome- fptp
Not either- need most not majority
-safe seat -unfiar
-high no. Wasted votes
Fair and representative outcome- sv
-moderately more representative
As long as 50%+ dont need 2nd vote
-bit fairer
-not proportional
Fair and representation outcome- ams
-both
-can vote diff parties for mp and party vote
-less watsed votes
-safe seats less affectibg
Stv-fair and representative
Most on both
-less wasted votes
-safe seats less affectibf
Strong-legit gov with clear madate, accountability- fptp and sv
-not clar majority as majoritarian not proprtional
-more likely on eparty ruling but not necessarily- has been minoruty or coalition
-clear accountablility- one party to blame
Ams and stv- Strong-legit gov with clear madate, accountability
-clearer mandate as proportional
-strong gov less likely as coalition more likely
-no one votes for coalition
-more accountable as more likely coalition and diff parties- less clear who to blame
Effective mp constituent link- fptp and sv
650 small constitucneis
-close link between
Surgeries on friday
Pmq on behalf
Effextive mp constituency link - ams
-have both mp and party vote so strong link
-party mps voted diff
Effective mp constituent link- stv
-larger constuencys
Less close link- travel further for sugeries
-bit may have diff party for constituent
So be rep by party of choice
-email correspondants
-no safe seats- worth votiing
Example of local referendum
2012
Birmingham and several other cirties
Should have democratically elected mayor
No 58:42
How many referendums since feb 2005
6
How many mayoral referendums (to have one) has there been in eng and wales
Over 50
Evidence public ARE educated on referendum issues
Issue scottish independance taught formally in all scottish schools
Callaghan opinion on referendums
‘Little rubber life raft into which the whole party may one day have to climb’
Agree to disagree
2019- the brexit party did not win any seats- how is this unfair?
Recieved 640,000 votes- 2%, yet no seats
If in pr would have 13 seats
Wasted votes
Votes which do not directly contribute to an mp being elected
2019 general election results- proportional?
Con 43.6% vote. 56% seats
Lib 11.5% vote 1.5% seats
Example how ams works in scotland 2021
Conservatives 5 seats but 23% votes, so had a top up of 26 seats
Greens in scotland 2021
0 constituency seats, 8% votes, so recieved 8 seats on regional list seats
Example of saafe seat
Bristol west- labour 47,000 votes, 9,000con. -2017
Example how winner overrewarded
Alasdair mcdonnell 2015
Sdlp in northern ireland- won with 24.5% votes
Examples of marginal seats
2019
Bedford, kensington, bury north
Example of extremism with pr
Dutch right wing populist ‘party for freedom’ became 2nd largest party in 2017
Impact welsh assemby elections w/ ams
Just 2/5 elections since 2003 have formed majorities
2021- labour minority
2016- labour and lib dem
1st national referendum
1975
Eec to eu
Scotland devolution election
97
74% yes
26% no
Turnouut 60%
N ireland- good friday agreement
71% yes
29% no
1998
81% turnout
Example when tyrnout for referendum high
81% 1998- good friday agreement
85% scotland 2014
72% 2016- brexit
Example election where close
Wales devolution 1997
50.3% yes
49.7% no
Turnout 50%
Example turnout low
34.6% 1998- london mayor
27.7% 2004- n.e region
50% 1997- welsh assembly
Referendum
A vote on a specific issue
Q- yes or no answer
Tool of irect democracy used w/in representative democracy
Called at gov’s discresion
Results advisory rather than binding- unlikely to be ignored
Electoral commission
Oversee way referendums run
Checks wording of referendum q
Ensure as objective as possible
Checks expendaiture undertaken by officially approved ‘ye’ ‘no’ campaigns organisation
Circumstances referendums helf
Decide major constitional change
Safegaurd constitutional change
Reach a decision when gov party splut
Unite nation on v decisive issue
As a part of a deal betweem coalition parties
Decide major constitutional change- examples
Devolution
Scottish independance
Safeguaurd a constitutional change
98- good friday agreement
Alread agreed but needed ni approval
Reach a decision when gov party split
Brexit- hope to unite conservatives
Unite nation on v. Decisiove issue
Brexit- 2016
Good friday agreement- 98
Scottish independance- 2014
As a part of a deal between coalition partnera
Av 2011
Compromise on pr in lib dem manifesto
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy
Representation
Participation
Legitimisation
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- intro
Loa- against
-a healthy democracy has representation,participation and legitimisation/accountability
Referendums always controversial- improve or weaken democracy?
Clinch example- brexit- failed in all 3 factors (apart from relatively high turnout)
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- representation- for
-form direct democracy- give the people a say on controversial issues- devolution, electoral reform
-give direct voice to. The people- outcome, clear representation of people on particular issue
Rather than rely on reps in parliament- who may put party before people
-allow poplar sovereignty to be expressed directly
-check on the power of the executive- 2016 in betweem 2015 and 2017
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- against- representation
-bad for representation- threat in representative democracy
Looses opportunity for debate and scruitiny
Expertise lost- ni protocol needed- nuance lost
-challenges parliamentary soverignty- no room for majority
-tyranny of the majoirty- no room for negotiation
Majority win- forcing their will onto others who ‘suffer’
Less representation- slim majoirity- 50.3% wales
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- participation- for
-engagement of public in political process0 another opportunity to vote
-hold politicians to accoutnt- between elections
-educate and inform- 2016- eu great debate bbc (sadiq khan remain vs boris leave)
Informative porgrammes broadcast- 2011 av
-turnot can be high- 85% 2014
Encouraging in ‘democratic deficit’ ‘participation crisis’
-participate local issues- over 50 referendums in eng and wales to have elected mayors
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- participation- againnst
-‘participation crisis’ sill present - av 42.2%- low turnout
-low turnout- reflect public opinion on referendums being less ‘significant’ compared to ge
Worsening participation and health of uk. Democracy
-misinformation
‘Leave’ ‘we send £350mill to the eu each week, let’s fund our nhs instead’
‘Remain’ ‘leaving the eu would cost each household 4,300 per year’
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- legitimisation- for
-clear outcomes on tricky political q- grants legitimacy to major constitutional change such as devolution
Esp important if gov not have strong mandate- harold wilson- eec had 301 minority gov
Equally to ‘entrench’ decision- 1998- good friday agreement made- need confirmation on such a divisive issue
-electoral commission- oversee referendums independanntly
Evaluate the view that the use of referendums is good for the health of uk democracy- legitimisation- against
-despite electoral commission- positively charged words ‘agree’ ‘improve’ more likelyt to have positive outcome- research european referendums
-clear answers not the case with slim majority
-cant hold ourselves to account- may later realise wrong- but can hold gov to account
Example of how cant hold public to account
Brexit
Apr 2019- 58% would vote remain
Evaluating use of referendums
- diff groups
People voting in referendums
Votes by mps in parliament
Gov decisions- cabinets
Evaluating use of referendums- voters- yes
Voice- deciison making- more power- controversial decision needed
-access to more info
Decision clear
Evaluating use of referendums- voters/people- no
Less experienced/education/opportunity to debate
Biggger threshold should be required
Problems with low turnouut- not represnetative- lack legitimacy
Public may be more influenced by social media and fake news- dont have civil service
Cant be held to account
Evaluating use of referendums- votes by mps in paliamet
More experienced, involved in debates
BUT
Not representative of votes in safe seats
May prioritise parties over constituents- go with party hwhip
Filibuster- jrm
Evaluating use of referendums- gov decisions - cabinet- yes
More experienced- their full time job- and have civil service
Can be held to account
Evaluating use of referendums- gov deciisons- cabinet- no
Not in manifesto- eg. Emergency- dont have mandate
If dont have mandate- no mandate
If large majority- lack scrutiny
