9.1.Electoral Systems (Elections and Referendums)

Question 1

FPTP voting system is positive - yes - Keeps out extremist parties

Answer 1

-Helps to keep out extreme parties that would otherwise gain more traction after winning seats

-In the 2015 general election UKIP only won 1 seat with 13% of the vote, which under proportional representation would’ve resulted in roughly 85 seats

-This lack of gaining seats can be seen as a contributing factor in party’s decline

Question 2

FPTP voting system is positive - yes - Provides strong and stable government

Answer 2

Praised for providing the country with a clear legitimate winner.
The ‘winners bonus’ allows a strong majority giving them the mandate to fulfill its manifesto
Allows the government to pass legislation which the public voted for successfully

E.g. Welfare Cap 2022 was passed successfully after all Conservatives who turned out on the day voted in favour of limiting the government’s spending on benefits

E.g. Government of Boris Johnson elected with 80 seat majority and only voted down in the Commons 4 times from 2019-21

Question 3

FPTP voting system is positive - yes - MP constituency link

Answer 3

MP’s elected have a clear accountability to their consitutnecy
E.g. Lib Dem MP Sarah Green for Amersham, fought for her constituents against the buidling of HS2 despite her party’s support of it.

Question 4

FPTP voting system is positive - yes - marginal seats

Answer 4

Attract lots of campainging meaning people are better edcated in politics
E.g. 2019 Sunderland Central LAB won 18,000 and the 2nd candiate CONS won 15,000

Question 5

FPTP voting system is positive -no - Unrepresentative Parliament

Answer 5

-Additionally FPTP is problematic as in the 2015 general election the SNP won 56 seats on 5% of the vote while UKIP won only 1 seat with 13% of the vote

-Due to lack of concentrated support UKIP had a huge amount of votes compared to its number of MPs

-While the SNP did gain 50% of the Scottish vote, to gain 95% of the Scottish seats was a gross distortion of SNP support

Question 6

FPTP voting system is positive - no - Fails in its main aim of producing a strong government

Answer 6

-Even the primary positive point of FPTP in providing a strong and stable government has failed to manifest with a hung Parliament twice in recent history (2010 coalition and 2017 confidence and supply agreement)

Question 7

FPTP voting system is positive - no - ‘Illegitimate MPs’

Answer 7

-Most MPs were again elected without a majority of their constituents votes

-Worst was Belfast South constituency in 2015 where the SDLP were elected with less than 25% of the vote, with all but 2 MPs lacking an absolute majority of votes

Question 8

FPTP voting stystem is positive - no - safe seats limit voter choice (uneuqal vote value)

Answer 8

Increases voter apathy as the seat is not inclined to change meaning people’s opinions may be going unheard for long periods of time
E.g. Wycombe has been Conservative since 1951

Question 9

FPTP voting system is positive - no - Unrepresentative government (winner’s bonus)

Answer 9

-Avoiding a hung Parliament is not necessarily a good thing if a single party government has minority support, such as in 2015 when the Conservatives won a majority (over 1/2 seats) with just 37% of the vote

-Therefore, FPTP produced a government with questionable democratic legitimacy

Question 10

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Attempt at AV

Answer 10

-Alternative vote suggested by the Lib Dems in the 2011 AV referendum as its main supporter, with the most to gain from it

-A system were voters number candidates in order of preference, The candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated and their voters then go on to their next preference, This is then repeated until a winner is found

-Largely defeated due to public disinterest and the opposition of the two largest parties in Conservatives and Labour who campaigned against it as they stood to lose the most

–Defeated – around 68% votes no on a turnout of 42%

Question 11

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Supplementary vote (SV) - How it works and where its used

Answer 11

-London Mayor Election

-Voters record their first and second preferences on the ballot paper

-If no candidate wins an outright majority of first preferences, then all but the top two are eliminated and the second preference votes for the top two candidates are added to the first preference votes

-The candidate with the highest total then wins

Question 12

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Supplementary vote (SV) - Positive effects

Answer 12

-The winning candidate must achieve broad support, meaning greater legitimacy

-Supporters of smaller parties can use their first preference to express their allegiance and then their second preference to tactically vote for which major party candidate they prefer, therefore not splitting the vote

-Proves that system could change the outcome of an election in a more democratic way as in the 2021 London Mayor Election, Labour candidate Sadiq Khan got 5% more than the Conservative candidate in the first preference, but 10% more in the second preference

Question 13

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Supplementary vote (SV) - Negative effects

Answer 13

-False majority - The winning candidate may be elected without winning a majority of votes, voters need to use either the first or second preferences for one of the top two candidates in order to affect the outcome

• Wasted votes which have no impact - your first and second choice might both not win

-As the candidate with the most first preference votes may not be elected after the second preferences are added on, may mean that the least unpopular candidate is elected rather than the most popular

-The system would not produce a proportional outcome if used for general elections

• Two-party dominance as it eliminates all but 2 candidates in one go so third parties are unlikley to be successful so the result is not proportional, encourages tatical voting on the second preference rather than providing a better choice for voters - when created in 2000 there has only been the 1 independent candidate in the second round who won (Ken Liveingstone - a former member of LAB). In his re-run in 2004 he was a LAB representative and won

Question 14

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Single transferable vote (STV) - How it works and where its used

Answer 14

-Used in Northern Ireland where representatives are elected in large multi-member constituencies, with 18 constituencies electing 6 members each

-Voting is preferential and electors number the candidates in the order of their preference

-Candidates must achieve a quota to be elected, with multiple candidates doing so, and any votes in excess of this quota are redistributed based on second preferences

-If no candidate reaches the quota on the first round, then the lowest-placed candidate is eliminated, and their second preferences are transferred

Question 15

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Single transferable vote (STV) - Positive effects

Answer 15

-Delivers proportional outcomes and ensures that votes are largely of equal value - 2017 Northern Ireland Assembly the percentage of first preference votes are very similar to the percentage of seats gained Dup 28% of first preference votes and got 31% of the seats. Sinn Fein got 28% of first preference votes with 27 seats hich is 30% of the seats

-The government is likely to consist of a party or group of parties that win over 50% of the vote

-Voters choose between a range of candidates from the same party, meaning there is greater choice than any other system

-Greater representation - latest Northern Ireland Assembly election was in 2022 with 7 different parties being elected to the 90-seat body

Question 16

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - Single transferable vote (STV) - Negative effects

Answer 16

-It can be less accurate in translating votes into seats than proportional representation list systems

-Large multi-member constituencies weaken the link between individual MPs and their constituency - challening to hold people accountable

-It is likely to produce a coalition government that may be unstable can give disproportional influence to minor parties that hold the balance of power e.g Suspended 2017-2020

-The counting process is lengthy and complex

• Higher chance of extremists parties

Question 17

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - The additional member system (AMS) - How it works

Answer 17

-Electors cast two votes, one for their favoured candidate in their single-member constituency, and one for their favoured party from a closed party list in a multi-member regional constituency

-For the multi-member regional constituencies, parties draw up a list of their candidates and decide the order in which they will be elected. As it is a closed list voters can only vote for a party and while the list of candidates for each party appears on the ballot paper, voters cannot choose between candidates of the same party

-The additional members seats are allocated on a corrective basis so a party with a disproportionately high number of constituency seats compared to number of votes won will receive few list seats, therefore ensuring the total number of seats won by a party is proportional to the number of votes won

Question 18

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - The additional member system (AMS) - Where its used

Answer 18

-A proportion of seats in the legislatures are elected by FPTP in single-member constituencies (60%. of seats in the Scottish Parliament and 2/3 of seats in the Welsh Senedd)

-The rest are elected in multi-member regional constituencies using the regional list system of proportional representation (40%. of seats in the Scottish Parliament and 1/3, of seats in the Welsh Senedd)

Question 19

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - The additional member system (AMS) - Positives effects

Answer 19

-Combines the best features of FPTP and proportional representation, such as balancing the desirability of constituency representation with that of fairness of outcome

-Voters have greater choice due to split-ticket voting allowing people to vote for two different parties. This encourages other parties to run in regionla ballots rather than just the main parties e.g. 2016 Green party got 1% of the consituency votes with 0 seats but in the regional vote got 7% giving them 6 seats

-Results are broadly proportional and votes are less likely to be wasted - In the 2021 Scottish elections, the SNP got 48% of the votes and won a similar 49.5% of MSP seats

Question 20

Alternative electoral systems used in the UK - The additional member system (AMS) - Negative effects

Answer 20

-Creates two tiers of representative, one with constituency duties and one without, meaning one representative is far more beholden to their voters than another

• More complicated as while voting is simple, what happens next is not. This can put voters off, as they may feel their vote will be mathematically maniulated. This may therefore reduce turnout.
• Unlikley to get a single gov. The proportional nature means coaltions are ikley weakening the gov making it challenging to pass legilsation e.g. as of the 2021 election the SNP had 64 seats and to form an alliance with the Green Party who have 7 seats
• The first round is FPTP so carries the same disadvantages

Question 21

2017 election if AMS

Answer 21

UKIP had 0 seats which would rise to 11

Green had 1 seat which would rise to 7

Conservatives had 317 seats which would fall to 273

Question 22

2017 election if STV

Answer 22

Labour had 262 seats which would rise to 297

SNP had 35 seats which would fall to 18

Conservatives had 317 seats which would fall to 283 seats

Green party had 1 seat which wouldn’t change

Plaid Cymru had 4 seats which would fall to 3

Question 23

Electoral commission set up

Answer 23

-Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 established The Electoral Commission with the role of ensuring the integrity and transparency of elections and referendums

-2016 EU referendum funding - Imposed spending limit of £7 million for each sides designated lead campaigners

• But the Leave campaign exceeded this as they funnelled £675,315 through pro-Brexit youth group BeLeave.

-However, the current maximum per-offence fine of £20,000 means that for politicians it is not at all a deterence.

Question 24

Scottish devolution referendum

Answer 24

-1997
-Good for democracy as it showed a clear mandate for the creation of this institution
-Almost 74.3% YES vote in referendum with a large turnout of 60.4%
-Lead to the Scotland Act 1998 creating the Scottish government

Question 25

Welsh devolution referendum

Answer 25

-1997

-Problems with Welsh devolution referendum in 1997 as it was just over 50% YES with a just over 50% turnout and in the 2011 Welsh referendum (about full-law making power) there was only a 35% turnout

-No Welsh Parliament elections have had more than a 46% turnout

-Labour has continuously been in the Welsh government since 1999

-Showing that these referendums have not been good for democracy

Question 26

AV referendum

Answer 26

-2011
-NO vote won at 67.9% with registered turnout just over 42%
-Turnout showed that referendums may not be good for democracy due to the lack of importance, also mean that had the result been YES then it would lack much democratic legitimacy

Question 27

Scottish Independence referendum

Answer 27

-2014
-NO vote firmly won at just over 55% with an extremely high turnout of almost 85%

-Despite this, there is still a large push for independence and a second referendum in Scotland, showing why referendums might not be good for democracy as even with a conclusive result there are people who push for that policy anyway

Question 28

EU referendum

Answer 28

-2016
-YES vote won at almost 52% with a fairly high turnout of 72%

-Shows why referendums might not be good for democracy as a monumental decision was made with only made by the side with only a small majority – tyranny of the majority

-Referendums may not be good for democracy as the close results show how divisive the EU referendum was within UK politics and UK society

Question 29

Consequences of referendums

Answer 29

Resulted in little political change

Parliament is soverign so doesn’t have to listen to the results - aren’t legal binding only advisory but public pressure to follow through makes this unlikley

Public expectation of more referendums - constitutional changes tend to happen but this is only a convention that can be broken

The increasing the desire for direct democracy has the potential to cause conflict between the public and their elected representatives.

Need for elected officlas to not have misleading campaigns

Question 30

Referendums are good for the UK - yes - encourages participation and education

Answer 30

Northern Ireland Belfast agreement had an 81% turnout in 1998

Question 31

Referendums are good for the UK - yes - provide clear answers to political issues

Answer 31

Devolved powers to Scotland (1997)

Question 32

Referendums are good for the UK - yes - the management is overseen by the Electoral Commission limiting government manipulation

Answer 32

The Electoral Commission fined the Leave Campaign for breaking electoral law - spending return was inaccurate in respect of 43 items of spending, totalling over £236,000

An unregistered campaign BeLeave exceeded its spending limit of £10,000 by more than £666,000, vote leave was fined £61,000

Question 33

Referendums are good for the UK - no - turnout for some refernedums is low

Answer 33

Replacing FPTP with AV 42% turnout

Question 34

Referendums are good for the UK - no - close results can be more divisive rather than settle the issue

Answer 34

Scottish independece in 2014 - people are still calling for independece calls. Result was 45% yes and 55% no

Question 35

Referendums are good for the UK - no - public make decisions that are ill-informed on or are mislead on

Answer 35

Strong, passionate MPs can influence the public with short-term appeals

Gove and Johnson misled the public by saying £350 million a week but the Office of National Statics said it was £199 million a week

The Leave campain wasn’t held accountable till after the referendum when the result had already been decided. Debate its legitimacy