3.1 - Different Electoral Systems Flashcards
What is a plurality voting system, what electoral system does is it described by, and where is it used?
- To win a seat, a candidate only requires one more vote than any other candidate meaning they do not need to secure an absolute majority
- FPTP
- UK generals, local council elections in England and Wales
What is a majoritarian voting system, what electoral system does is it described by, and where is it used?
- Used to select a single candidate, these systems are designed to attempt to secure an absolute majority for the winning candidate
- SV
- London mayor elections, other metro mayor elections
What is a proportional voting system, what electoral system does is it described by, and where is it used?
- A system that attempts to allocate seats in direct proportion to votes cast – as such they are multi-member constituencies
- STV
- NI parliament, SC local gov
What is a hybrid voting system, what electoral system does is it described by, and where is it used?
A system that mixes two other types of system EG plurality and proportional
- AMS
- Scottish Parliament, Welsh Senedd, Greater London Assembly
What is first past the post?
FPTP is an electoral system where the person with the highest number of votes is elected – victory is achieved by having one more vote than the other contenders – it is also called a plurality system
Key features of FPTP (5)
- Small, single member constituencies
- Winner takes all based on a plurality
- Voting is simple, place an X next to your chosen candidate
- Voters get one vote for one candidate
- Voters choose a candidate not a party
How many constituencies with how many people on average are there in the UK?
- 650 constituencies
- On average 75,000 people per constituency
Arguments for FPTP - Parties concentrating support
Gives an advantage to parties that can concentrate their support – EG
- Regional support for Sinn Fein and the DUP in NI every election
- 2019 – SNP – 1.2 million votes for 48 seats
- 2001 = 40% of the votes = 413 seats (63%) – Labour
-2005 = 35% of the votes = 356 seats (55%) – Labour
Other arguments for FPTP (understanding, bond, accountability)
- It is easy to understand and produces a clear result in each constituency
- It produces one single representative for each constituency so creates a close constituency-MP bond
- The accountability of the individual MP is clear to voters
Arguments against FPTP - Parties with dispersed support
Disadvantages parties whose support is dispersed – EG
- 2019 – LibDem – 11 seats – 11.5% of the vote
- 1983 – LibAllience – 23 seats – 25% of the vote
- 1983 – Labour – 209 seats – 27% of the vote
- 2015– UKIP – 1 seat – 12% of the vote
- 2015 – Greens – 1 seat – 3% of the vote
Other disadvantages of FPTP (proportion, wasted votes, parties securing a majority)
- The outcome is not proportional or fair – some parties win more seats than their support warrants while others win fewer than they deserve
- Votes are effectively wasted in safe seats as support for the main party is so strong that there is no possibility of a realistic change - EG
2015 election estimated to have 368 safe seats - HOWEVER in 2019 supposedly safe seats in the Red Wall collapsed so not 100% accurate - Since 1945 the winning party has never secured an outright majority of the vote - EG in 2015 Cons elected with just 36% of the vote – 63% of people voted against the governing party - In 2005 Lab won 35% of the votes but 55% of the seats
What is AMS and where is it used?
- A hybrid system that combines FPTP with a proportional representation system
- Used in Scotland and Wales and for the Greater London Assembly
How does AMS work?
- A proportion of seats is awarded through FPTP while the rest are awarded through a regional closed party list system
- In Scotland and Wales, the variable top-up system adjusts the proportions of votes on the list based on the over or under representation a party has received through the FPTP voting
- Basically the seats awarded from the list system are adjusted to give a more proportional result
- This means that ever voter has two votes – one for a constituency candidate and another for a party
Arguments for AMS (4)
- Produces a broadly proportional outcome and is fair to all parties
- It gives voters two votes and therefore more choice
- It combines preserving constituency representation with a proportional outcome
- It helps small parties that cannot win constituency contests
Arguments against AMS (3)
- It produces two classes of representative – those with a constituency and those elected through lists – the latter tends to be senior
- It is more complex than FPTP – having two votes can confuse some voters
- It can result in the election of extremist candidates
Results of the 2021 Scottish Parliamentary elections % of seats won and % of votes received for SNP, Cons, and Lab
- SNP - 40.3% of votes - 49.6% of seats
- Cons - 23.4% of votes - 24% of seats
- Lab - 17.9% of votes - 17% of seats
- Shows that AMS is broadly proportional
Where is STV used and what type of system is it?
Used in NI for its Assembly elections and local council elections – proportional system
How does STV work?
- Very complex system
- Typically 6 seats available in each constituency
- Each party is permitted up to 6 candidate (one for each constituency) – in practice parties usually only have 4 candidates as they have little chance of winning all 6 seats
- Voters place the candidates in order of preference
- At the court, an electoral quota is established – this is the total number of votes cast divided by the number of seats available plus 1
- Initially, all the first preferences for each candidate is counted – any who achieve the electoral quota are elected automatically
- Then, the candidate that comes last is eliminated and the second preferred candidate on the last placed candidates’ ballots are counted towards the other candidates’ totals – if this results in someone achieving the electoral quote, they are elected
- This process continues until six candidates have achieved the quota and are elected
Advantages of STV (5)
- It produces a broadly proportional outcome
- It gives voters a very wide choice of candidate – the second and subsequent choices of voters are taken into account
- Voters can vote for candidates from a different party and show a preference between candidates of the same party
- As there are 6 representatives per constituency, each voter has a choice of those to represent them and can usually be represented by someone from their party
- It helps small parties and independent candidates get elected
Disadvantages of STV (4)
- It is quite a complex system that some voters do not fully understand
- The vote counting is complicated and can take a long time
- It can help candidates with extremist views to be elected
- With 6 representatives per constituency, the lines of accountability are not clear
Results of the NI assembly election 2022 in terms of % of seats won and % of first preference votes for Sinn Fein, DUP, and Alliance Parties
- Sinn Fein - 29% of first preference votes - 30% of seats won
- DUP - 21% of first preference votes - 27% of seats
- Alliance party - 13% of first preference votes - 18% of seats won
- Shows that STV results are very proportional
Comparing the three voting systems - Is there a clear winning mandate?
- FPTP - Clear winning mandate
- AMS - Mixed - still has a clear winner but also has top up candidates
- STV - Weaker due to multi-member constituencies
Comparing the three electoral systems - Is there a clear winning party with a sufficient mandate?
FPTP - Usually secures a clear winning party and mandate
AMS - Less likely to secure single party gov – but WL and SC have had single party dominance and SC had a majority post 2011
STV - Much less likely to achieve this and more likely to rely on coalitions
Comparing the three electoral systems - Is it easy to understand?
- FPTP - Easy to understand
- AMS - A mixture of two systems operating on different principles making it slightly more complicated but has worked where used
- STV - Much more complicated but has worked where used
Comparing the three electoral systems - Does it promote smaller/extremist parties?
- FPTP - Stops extremist parties and other small parties from winning seats
- AMS - More likely that smaller parties will gain some form of representation, but not much
- STV - Much more likely that smaller or extremist parties will gain some form of representation
Comparing the three electoral systems - Is it proportional?
- FPTP - Lacks proportionality
- AMS - The worst aspects of proportionality are tempered by the top-up seats, though not eliminated
- STV - Far more proportional representation of parties
Comparing the three electoral systems - Is there a strong constituency to MP link?
- FPTP - Strong constituency-MP link
- AMS - Strong for FPTP aspect but weak for the top-up seats
- STV - Much weaker constituency link