Electoral systems Flashcards

Question

state an example of a plurality system

Answer 1

- proportional systems - majority systems - hybrid system

Answer 2

proportional system refer to systems that produce an outcome whereby the competing parties are awarded seats in the legislature in proportion to the votes cast for them, either exactly or approximately. so a directly proportional system would award 40% of the seats to a party that won 40% of the popular vote.

Answer 3

Majority systems are systems which are used to elect a single candidate, for example a president or major. They are designed to ensure that the winner can claim the support of an overall majority of voters

Answer 4

Hybrid systems which are mixture of two systems. The main example is the additional member system, which is mixture of FPTP and a proportional system

Answer 5

Proportional representation (PR) refers to any electoral system that tends to produce a proportional outcome. In other words, the seats in the representative body are awarded in an election broadly in the same proportion. as the votes cast for each party. An example would be that if a party wins 40% of the votes it will be awarded 40% of the seats available. The regional list system and the single transferable vote system are examples of PR

Answer 6

The additional member system is a hybrid system that combines FPTP with a PR system. It is used in Scotland, wales and for the greater London assembly. A version is also used in Germany. A proportion (which varies from country to country) of the seats is awarded through FPTP. The rest are awarded on a regional list system. This means that every voter has two votes. One is for a constituency candidate in the FPTP way, the other is from a choice of party lists.

Answer 7

The additional member system is a hybrid system that combines FPTP with a PR system. It is used in Scotland, wales and for the greater London assembly. A proportion (which varies from country to country) of the seats is awarded through FPTP. The rest are awarded on a regional list system. This means that every voter has two votes. One is for a constituency candidate in the FPTP way, the other is from a choice of party lists. some of the elected representatives have a constituency to look after, while others do not. The latter have been elected from the lists and are free of constituency responsibilities. No real distinction is made between the two through the senior party members tend to be elected from lists rather than constituencies with an MP to represent them it helps smaller parties, but also favours the larger ones it achieves two objectives at the same time, preserving the idea of constituencies and a constituencies representative, but producing a much more proportional result than FPTP.

Answer 8

- two thirds of the seats are elected using FPTP as for a UK general election - the other third of seats are elected on a PR system based on several regions of the country. This is known as the regional list part of the system - this is an important variation in the regional list part of the vote. The variable top-up system adjusts the proportions of votes cast on the list system. This is a complex calculation, but in essence, what happens is that the seats awarded from the system are adjusted to give a more proportional result. It is known as the D'Hondt method - Parties that do less well in the constituencies (typically conservatives and greens) have their proportion of list votes adjusted upwards. Those that do proportionally well under FPTP (usually labour) have their list of votes adjusted downwards - The overall effect of a variable top up is to make the total result in seats close to proportional to the total votes cast in both systems

Answer 9

- it produces a broadly proportional outcome and so is fair to all parties - it gives voters two votes and so more choice - it combines preserving constituency representation with a proportional outcome - it helps small parties which cannot win constituency contests

Answer 10

- it produces two classes of representative - those with a constituency and those elected through the lists which the latter tends to be more senior - it is more complex than FPTP. having two votes may confuse voters - it can result in the election of extremist candidates

Answer 11

Results of elections under AMS show that a party can win some of its seats through constituency contests and the rest from regional list elections in which voters choose a party rather than an individual The 2016 results highlight how well each party performed in both the constituency elections and the list elections. (* seats on the regional list system are manipulated to produce a more proportional result*) For example, the scottish national party who dominates scotland elections won 59 constituency seats, won 4 regional list seats giving them a total of 63 seats, with 48.8% seats won and 31.7% of votes won in the regional lists. This can be contrasted with the conservative party who won 7 constituency seats, won 24 regional list seats, giving them a total of 31 seats won, which meant they won 24% of the seats won and 22.9% of votes won in the regional lists Another prominent example is the green party who won 0 constituency seats, won 6 regional list seats, giving them a total of 6 seats, meaning they won 4.7% seats won and 6.6% votes won in the regional lists

Answer 12

The scottish parliament elections in 2016 shows the proportion of seats won by each party is quite close to the proportion of votes each of them won in the party list contest, so the result is roughly proportional. - The election also shows how smaller parties won very few constituency seats but it is more compared to FPTP. - Conversely, the SNP won 59 out of the 73 constituency seats available as had this election been conducted under FPTP the snp would have dominated by winning 104 (81%) out of 129 seats - Under AMS, the SNP won 48.8% of the seats on 41.7% of the popular vote, a much more proportional outcome

Answer 13

STV is the system used in Northern Ireland for all of its elections. It is also used for local government elections in Scotland and for general elections in the republic of Ireland. - it is commonly described as a proportional system - it's a complex system, especially when it comes to the counting and the establishment of the result. T

Answer 14

- There are six seats available in each constituency. Each party is permitted to put up as a many candidates as there are seats. i.e up to six. In practice, parties do not adopt six candidates as they have no chance of winning all six seats available. Four is the normal maximum amount for each party. Voters place the candidates in their order of preference by placing a number 1,2,3 etc beside each name. Voters can vote for candidates from different parties or even all parties, though few do At the council an electoral quota is calculated. This is established by taking the total number of votes cast and dividing it by the number of seats available plus 1. So if 50,000 votes are cast and six seats are available the quota is 50,000 divided by 6+1 and works out at 7,143. One is then added to give the final figure of 7,144. At first all the first preferences are counted for each candidate. Any candidate who achieves the quota are elected automatically. After this stage, the counting is complex. Essentially, the second and subsequent preferences from the ballot papers of the elected candidates are added to other candidates. If this results in an individual achieving the quota he or she is elected. This process continues until six candidates have achieved the quota and are elected

Answer 15

STV is complex counting system designed to ensure that voters preferences are aggregated up to make sure that the six most popular candidates overall will be elected The overall outcome tends to be highly proportional, with each party achieving its fair share of the votes and seats. This was demonstrate in the single constituency contest from the Northern Ireland assembly election in 2016 illustrating how this system works Results of Fermanagh and South Tyrone Constituency 2016: - DUP offered 2 candidates and 2 candidates were elected - Sinn Fein offered 4 candidates and 2 candidates were elected - Ulster Unionists offered 2 candidates and 1 candidate was electd - SDLP offered 1 candidate and 1 candidate was elected The quota was 6,740. Only one candidate, Arlene Foster of the DUP achieved the quota on first preference of votes.

Answer 16

The Northern Ireland Assembly 2016 overall results demonstrates how the proportional the outcome is as every party won approximately the same proportion of seats as the proportion of first preference votes gained. It is also interesting to see how many parties won some representation For example, the DUP won 38 seats with 35.2% won and 29.3 % of first preference votes won Sinn fein won 28 seats with 25.9% seats won and 24.0% first preference votes won Ultster unionists won 16 seats with 14.8% won and 12.6% first preferences votes won Alliance won 8 seats with 7.4% won and 7.0 % first preference votes won This clearly shows how proportional the outcome is with the single transferable vote system as every party won approximately the same proportion of seats as the proportion of first preference votes gained. It is also interesting to see how many parties won some representation

Answer 17

- it produces a broadly proportional outcome - it gives voters a very wide choice of candidates to choose from. The second and subsequent choices of the voters are taken into consideration in the counting. - voters can vote for candidates from different parties and show a preference between candidates of the same party - as there are six representatives per constituency, each voter has a choice of those to represent them and usually they can be represented by someone from the party they support - it helps small parties and independent candidates to be elected

Answer 18

- It is a complex system that some voters do not understand - the vote counting is complicated and can take a long time - it can help candidates with extremist views to be elected - with six representatives per constituency the lines of accountability of are not very clear

Answer 19

Supplementary vote is a system used where a single candidate is to be elected. It is designed to produce a winner who can claim to be supported overall by a majority of voters. In the Uk, its main use is to elect city mayors. it could be used to elect MPs but there is no appetite for this kind of reform Most reformers prefer the idea of PR rather than the SV

Answer 20

In the supplementary vote system voters have two choices, a first and second choice. If any candidate achieves an overall majority i.e 50%+ of the first choice or round, he or she is automatically elected If this does not happen, the top two candidates go into a second round of counting. All the others drop out. The second choice votes are added to the first choices to give two final totals As there are only two candidates left, one of them must achieve an absolute majority. So the winner has an overall majority of a combination of first and second round votes. The following tables shows how this worked in the election of Sadiq Khan. He achieved 44.2% of the vote in the first round, but 161,427 voter put him as their second choice and this was enough to give him an overall majority

Answer 21

Most commentators believe that the supplementary vote system have few serious rivals when it comes to electing a single official and it is used in the vast majority of democracies for this kind of election. For example, Sadiq Khan who was the candidate for the labour party in the first round of votes won 1,148,716 which was 44.2% and in the second round of votes he gained 1,310,143 which meant he was elected mayor of London. OTHER CANDIDATES: Zac Goldsmith was a conservative candidate that in the first round of the votes won 909,755 which was 35% and in the second round of vote he gained 994,614 votes Sian Berry who was green party candidate in the first round of the vote won 150,673 which meant she won 5.8% which disqualified her from the second round of votes

Answer 22

- the winning candidate can claim to have an overall majority of support - it is relatively simple for voters to understand - voters first and second choice are relevant

Answer 23

- a winning candidate may not enjoy the first choice of support of an overall majority - the winning candidate may win on second choices

Answer 24

Decision makers hope to produce a party system that was most desirable in each of its different contexts. For example, STV was adopted in Northern Ireland in order to reflect the fact that it is a divided community and that all the different communities should be represented in a multi party system. So five different parties achieved significant representation in the northern Ireland assembly.

Answer 25

FPTP - it is a plurality system used for UK general elections, English and Welsh Local elections Additional Member System (AMS) - it is a hybrid system, used for Scottish parliamentary elections, welsh assembly elections and Greater London Assembly elections Single Transferrable Vote (STV) - it is a proportional system, used for all northern Ireland elections and local elections in Scotland ``` Supplementary vote (SV) - it is a majority system used to elect city mayors e.g mayor of london ```

Answer 26

to Northern Ireland, in Scotland after devolution in 1997 the danger was perceived that the Labour Party would dominate the country if FPTP was retained. The change to AMS ensured that the main English parties could not dominate which ironically worked well. The political system in Scotland is now dominated by the SNP and the English parties have been placed at a disadvantage. In wales, AMS has done its work well and there is a very balanced party system there

Answer 27

FPTP, seems destined to remain as the system used for general elections for some time to come. This is largely because the political establishment (in both main parties) take a broadly conservative view of the issue Most senior politicians prefer the status quo and fear the unknown as represented by proportional representation

Answer 28

The british people had a choice in a 2011 referendum and rejected an alternative to FPTP which was the alternative vote (AV). This system is used in Australia The AV system is seldom used (it is sometimes used in by-elections in STV systems) and is unlikely to be considered in the future The result of the 2011 referendum (which overwhelmingly rejected AV) should not be taken to indicate that the public is opposed to reform. There were a number of reasons why the public rejected AV which are unrelated to people wanting a charge to the FPTP system.

Answer 29

The proposal was promoted by the liberal democrats (in coalition government at that time with the conservatives) and the party was very unpopular at this time. It is therefore estimated that many voters used the referendum to show dissatisfaction with the liberal democrats rather than to reject AV. AV is a complex system, so many voters who rejected it may not understand it. The pro-reform campaign was poorly run while the anti-reform campaign was well organised and funded

Answer 30

Introducing a proportional representation for the UK general elections would produce a multi-party system Parties like the Brexit Party, Greens, Liberal Democrats and Plaid cymru would win a significant number of seats The larger parties, conservatives, labour, SNP would win considerably fewer seats than currently. For some this is desirable, an outcome that would provide a pluralist, more representative result and mean that voters were better represented On the other hand, some would argue that it might give an opening to extremist parties and probably create a chaotic political system with too many competing parties

Answer 31

This kind of multi party system described above would prevent any party from winning an overall majority in parliament This can be seen as a desirable outcome to some as it would prevent governments being excessively powerful. In order to govern as a minority government or coalition, a government would have to seek a consensus on every issue and democracy would be better served. Critics point to the instability this would produce with governments frequently failing and having to be reformed as occurs in some european states. Without a parliamentary majority governments, would lose their decisiveness and be unable to deliver their electoral mandate

Answer 32

Supporters of the introduction of a proportional system insist that voters interests would be better served every vote would count and be of equal value and there would be more voter choice proportional systems favour the selection of women and ethnic minority candidates above all voters would no longer need to vote tactically and would be able to support their first choice candidates/parties critics point out that proportional systems are more difficult to understand they also say that the close relationship between MPS and constituencies would be a blow to democracies the supporters of proportional representation see the debate as democracy vs over powerful government, equality vs discrimination those who favour the retention of FPTP see the issue in terms of order over chaos strong vs weak government

Answer 33

Referendums refers to a vote, which may be national, regional or local in which qualified voters are asked a single question about a proposal where the answer is either 'yes' or 'no' National referendums are not legally binding on parliament or government, but it is unthinkable that their outcome would be ignored

Answer 34

Before 1975, referendums were almost in the UK political system. - There was an attempt to hold a referendum in Northern Ireland in 1973 but it failed as half the community boycotted it. - In 1975, there was a national referendum on whether the Uk should remain a member of the european community (a forerunner of the EU) - The Uk has joined the EC two years before. I was seen as a once in a generation event and so it proved. - The next national referendum was not held until 2011, when the country was asked if it wanted to adopt a new electoral system for general elections - In between these two national referendums there were some local and regional referendums, but it seemed that the device of holding referendums to decide key issues was seen as a 'last resort' - since 2011, two ground breaking referendums have been held, so that they now seem to be that they are an established part of the Uk constitution These two referendums were the 2014 vote on whether scotland should become an independent state and the 2016 referendum whose outcome meant that the UK would leave the EU

Answer 35

A referendum is simply defined as vote, conducted at local, regional or national level, in response to a question with a simple yes or no answer (In 2016 voters were asked to choose between leave or remain) - The key reason why a referendum might be held is that, for some reason it is felt preferable that the people themselves should resolve an issue rather than the elected representatives of the people Criticisms of a referendum: Many political commentators may ask why should a people's vote be preferable to a vote in an elected assembly? It can be argued that in a representative democracy we elect people to make decisions on our behalf, to use their judgement and to mediate between competing demands. Why should we make these decisions ourselves?

Answer 36

Referendums may be used if the: - the issue may be so crucial that it is felt that only a popular vote can resolve it. This was the case with the proposal to reform the electoral system in 2011. - it may be that the issue causes so much conflict within the political system and among its elected representatives that the only way to resolve it without excessive political conflict is to let the people decide directly. Both sides in a political conflict have to accept the outcome. This was the case with both referendums on Uk membership of the EC in 1975 and the EU in 2016. - A referendum may be the only way to resolve a conflict within the wider community. In 1998 the people of Northern Ireland were invited to vote on whether to accept the good friday agreement (also known as the Belfast Agreement) which was to end many years of conflict between nationalist and loyalist communities in the province and establish a power sharing from of government - The liberal doctrine of government by consent demands that the system of government to which people submit can only exist with the consent of the people themselves. This implies that any fundamental change to the way we are governed must achieved direct consent through any fundamental change to the way we are governed must achieve direct consent through a referendum. When increased powers were proposed to be given to devolved administration in scotland and wales in 1997. (so called devolution), it had to be put to the people of those nations

Answer 37

Government by consent refers to the idea, developed by liberal theorists that government must enjoy the consent of the people who are to be governed This implies that the people must show consent to how they are governed and what the system of government should be

Answer 38

1975 - Should the Uk remain a member of the european community? Level - National Why was it held? - The labour government was divided on the issue Commentary: This was the first Uk wide referendum. In campaigning for it, prime minister Harold Wilson's pamphlet said 'the government will accept your verdict' outcome: yes % - 67.2% no % - 32.8% TURNOUT: 64.5%

Answer 39

1997 - should additional powers be devolved to Scotland and a Scottish parliament established Level - Regional referendums in scotland Why was it held? - A fundamental change in the system of government needed a popular consent Commentary: The Labour manifesto in 1997 committed to giving both Scotland and Wales a referendum over whether power should be devolved to them. As a result of both countries ‘yes’ vote, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly were established. outcome: yes% - 74.3% no% - 25.7% TURNOUT: 60.4%

Answer 40

1997 - Should additional powers be devolved to wales and welsh assembly established? Level - Regional Referendums in wales Why was it held? A fundamental change in the system of government needed a popular consent Outcome: yes % - 50.3 no % - 49.7% TURNOUT: 50.1%

Answer 41

1998 - Should the belfast agreement be implemented? Level - Regional referendums in northern ireland Why was it held? This required support across the whole divided community commentary: This was held as a result of the Northern Ireland peace process. Outcome: Yes% - 71.7% No% - 28.9% TURNOUT: 81%

Answer 42

2004 - Should additional powers be devolved to the north east england and a regional assembly established Level: North East England - Regional Why was it held? A fundamental change in the system of government needed a popular consent outcome: Yes% = 22.1% No% - 77.9% TURNOUT: 47.7%

Answer 43

2005- Should a congestion charge zone be introduced in Edinburgh Level: Local referendum held in Edinburgh Why was it held? It was a highly controversial proposal Outcome: Yes% = 25.6% No% = 74.4% TURNOUT: 61.7%

Answer 44

2011 - Should the UK adopt the alternative vote system for general elections LEVEL: National referendum Why was it held? The coalition government was divided on the issues of electoral reform commentary: Held due to the coalition agreement between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats Outcome: Yes% = 32.1% No% = 67.9% Turnout: 42.2%

Answer 45

2014 - Should Scotland become a completely independent country LEVEL: REGIONAL referendum - Scotland Why was it held? A fundamental question about who governs Scotland Commentary: Held due to pressure from the Scottish government. 16- and 17-year olds were allowed to vote. Outcome: Yes% = 44.7% No% = 55.3% Turnout: 84.6%

Answer 46

2016 - Should the UK remain a member of the european union? Level: NATIONAL REFERENDUM Why was it held? A fundamental constitutional question. The governing conservative party was split on the issue, and also wanted to meet the challenge of UKIP commentary: Held due to promise made by the Conservatives in the 2015 general election manifesto Outcome: remain% = 48.1% leave% = 51.9% Turnout: 72.2%

Answer 47

holding a referendum is not a simple task. It requires a lot of preparation and planning. In general, the stages leading to referendum are these: - the governing party adopts a policy that a referendum should be held on an issue - the precise wording of the referendum question is established - legislation is passed in parliament, setting up the arrangements for a referendum including the date it is to be held - The referendum is held and the result announced - Referendums are never legally binding, but it is virtually unthinkable that a representative body should not obey the outcome. If the result requires change, legal and political arrangements for the change are made - A number of regulations tend to the govern the conduct of the referendum campaigns - in national and regional referendums there is official recognition of the bodies that campaign on each side of the question - expenditure on referendum campaigns is regulated to ensure that each side spends approximately equal funds This is done by the electoral commission which also ensures that both sides in the electoral campaign do not issue false information and organises the counting of votes

Answer 48

Proposition is a device used in some countries including Switzerland and parts of the US, where a petition signed by a large number of voters can trigger a referendum. The voters, rather than the government decide what issues should be put to a referendum

Answer 49

A variation of the referendum system is the initiatives. An initiatives occurs when the people themselves decide a referendum should be held. In the Uk, it is government and the legislature that decide when a referendum should be held, but initiatives are widely held in some states in the US The way initiatives normally work is that citizens must create a petition asking for a popular vote. When an agreed number of names are on the petition, a referendum (sometimes known as a 'proposition' in the US) is triggered. An example is a California where the petition required equals 5% of voters at the last election for state governor.

Answer 50

2008 - Arizona state - to amend the state constitution to prohibit same sex marriage. Passed 2012 - California state - to temporarily increase sales tax in the state to pay for improved education and other services. Passed. 2012 - Massachusetts state - to make assisted legal suicide legal. Failed. 2014 - Oregon State - to legalised recreational use of marijuana. Passed

Answer 51

Switzerland operates a similar system to the US. There 100,000 signatures are needed to trigger a referendum. Some swiss examples are: 1971 - to grant voting rights to women. Passed 2014 - to order the government to prevent 'mass immigration' Passed 2016 - to authorize the building of a new road tunnel under the Alps. Passed. 2016 - to expel all foreign born criminals from the country. Failed In the UK, it remains firmly in the hands of the government and parliament which issues should be put to the electorate in a referendum

Answer 52

Referendums are very different to elections as there are many key differences as stated below which illustrates the key differences between the two devices - Referendums are always on a single issue whereas elections are fought on a wide range of issues across all the business of government - Referendums demand a single yes/no answer whereas elections result in a more nuanced, varied outcome, with different levels of representation awarded to different parties. As we have seen, the government and parliament decide when referendums should be held. Elections, by contrast, normally occur at regular intervals determined by law. There is one crucial similarity, Both referendums and elections grant legitimacy to decisions. In the case of an action, the winners claim a mandate for their policies; with referendums, the electorate are directly granting authority to governments to implement a specific decisions

Answer 53

There is a maxim in politics that governments should never call a referendum unless they are very confident about what the answer will be: - There are two reasons why it is sensible - Governments use of referendums as a way of securing direct consent for policies they might have introduced themselves. Examples would be devolution for scotland and wales and Northern Ireland in the late 1990s. Devolution was effectively a policy of the labour government at the time.,but they needed to reinforce the idea with confirmation in a referendum. The government was confident it would win the three votes - If a government supports one side of a referendum debate, it will be placed in a difficult position if its loses the debate. It is a severe blow to its authority. This happened in 2016, when thr UK voted to leave the EU. The result was traumatic. The prime minister, David Cameron felt this position was untenable and resigned. The wider result was a complete change in the government state on Europe and many ministers lost their positions. The referendum also shook the labour party. Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the labour party at the time lost support of most of the party's MP's largely because he was seen to campaign poorly for remain. - The 2014 vote on the Scottish referendum was what the government of the Uk wanted but it did have a major impact on the policies of devolution. The closeness of the outcome was a huge boost to the SNP. Before that, during the campaign as the outcome was thrown increasingly into doubt, all three main english parties were forced to promise scotland greater powers for their parliament and government - The government won the vote but it was too close for comfort. The scottish referendum result did not result in independence but it result in a major shift in power towards Edinburgh - The government won the vote but it was too close for comfort. The Scottish Referendum result did not result in independence but it result in a major shift in power towards Edinburgh. Then 2 years later with the EU referendum a fresh scottish crisis. 62% of scots voted to remain. This meant that scots were being dragged out of the EU againist their will. The result has been renewed calls for a second referendum on scottish independence so that scotland can stay in the EU. Referendums can therefore change things whatever the outcome. They can promote political change and they can also remove policies from the immediate political agenda, as occurred when electoral reform was soundly rejected in 2011

Answer 54

Until recently public opinion seemed to be turning in favour of the use of referendums, especially after the vote on Scottish independence in 2014. That referendum was deemed as a success in that it involved the majority of people of Scotland and its result was emphatic enough to settle the issue for some time to come Then the referendum on the Uk's membership of the EU changed attitudes again. The result, which shook the political establishment and was totally unexpected in the light of the opinion polls, demonstrated how divided a society the UK had become In some senses the issue was settled, a majority was narrowly voted to leave the EU, but is also led to fears that the narrow minority which voted to remain in the EU was tyrannized by the majority Many commentators suspected that many of those who voted to leave were not voting on the issue of the EU itself; but on wider issues that their voices were not being heard by the political system based in london The EU poll revealed that many concerns that people have expressed about referendums. The winning side of course has had a different perspective. For them, it was hugely successful exercise in popular democracy. Conventional policies had been defeated by the will of the majority.

Answer 55

FOR ARGUEMENTS - - Referendums are the purest form of democracy, uncorrupted by the filter of representative democracy. They demonstrate the pure will of the people, as occurred in the EU vote - Referendums can mend rifts in society, as occurred with the decisive vote in 1998 on the Belfast Agreement - Referendums can solve conflicts within the political system and so stave off a crisis. This was especially the case with the EU referendums in both 1975 and 2016. - Referendums are particularly useful when expressed (as opposed to implied) consent of the people is important, so that the decision will be respected. This was very true of the votes on devolution in 1997. - Arguably the people are much more informed than they have ever been in the past. The internet and social media in particular have facilitated this. This makes them more capable of making decisions for themselves rather than relying on elected representatives.

Answer 56

- The people may not be able to understand the complexities of an issue such as the consequences of leaving the EU or adopting a new electoral system. - Referendums can cause social rifts. This arguably occurred in both 2014 in Scotland and 2016 in the EU referendum. - There is a danger that the excessive use of referendums may undermine the authority of representative democracy. This has been a particular danger in some states in the US. - A referendum can represent the ‘tyranny of the majority’. This means that the majority that wins the vote can use their victory to force the minority to accept a change which is against their interests. The Scots, who voted strongly to stay in the EU in 2016, claimed they were being tyrannized by the English majority. - Voters may be swayed by emotional rather than rational appeals. It may also be that they are influenced by false information. - Some questions should not be reduced to simple yes/no answers; they are more complicated. The 2011 question on electoral reform is an example of this. Perhaps several different opinions should have been considered, not one.

Answer 57

The 2016 referendum on the european union was like no other and was more controversial than anything before. This was for two reasons: - the decision was so incredibly significant, determining the whole future of the UK - It caused so much fragmentation within the political system, both the labour and conservative parties were convulsed by the result and a major schism developed between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Furthermore, the losing side especially argued that the campaign had been distorted by false information and by negative campaigning, playing on peoples fears.

Answer 58

- representatives are more likely to adopt a rational approach and resist emotional reactions to questions, e.g many voters were concerned about immigration in the EU referendum and were responding to appeals to their patriotism and the perceived dangers to 'British Values' posed by too many migrants entering communities. Elected representatives on the other hand could weigh up the benefits as well as the problems of high numbers of migrants - Elected politicians have an army of well informed advisers to help them make decisions. They can ensure that the information on which they base their judgements are accurate. Most people have to rely on the media print, broadcast and social for their information, which is at bets conflicting and at worst dubious. This was certainly a problem leading up to a EU referendum during the campaign - Elected representatives have to concern themselves with the competing interests of both the majority and minorities. Voters, on the other hand and for understandable reasons usually only think of their own interests. The citizens of Edinburgh and Manchester have voted in local referendums against the imposing of congestion charges on motorists entering the city centre. It seems the majority of voters did not consider the minority of voters who suffer from air pollution and public transport users. In contrast, london did introduce congestion charges in 2003 under elected mayor Ken Livingstone. He could take into account the interests of public transport users and the wider population suffering from pollution as well as motorists

Answer 59

- those who opposed the use of referendum in 2016, on whether the UK should leave the EU were adamant that such a key decision should have been made by parliament - perhaps the subject of a free vote in the house of commons and not by the people who are poorly placed to exercise a rational judgement

Answer 60

- elections are used to choose representatives. In a democracy, legislators and decision makers have to be elected - elections are the most important way in which citizens become involved in politics. For many, it is their own form of political participation. It is vital that citizens do participation to ensure the public accountability of government and the legislature - Elections are a time when government and elected representatives can be called to account. During the campaign the candidates must justify what they and their party have done. All their past record and their current policies are put under close scrutiny during the run up to an election - democracy demands that the people have choice over those who represent their interests. Elections provide that choice, thoroughly explained. - Elections have an educative function. An informed citizenry is essential if democracy is to remain healthy. During election campaigns the public can become better informed over the key political issues that face their locality, region or nation - elections provide a mandate. The winners in an election are granted democratic legitimacy, the political authority to carry out the political programme they are proposing. Without such a mandate and the accountability that goes with it, democracy will fail

Answer 61

Uk elections enjoy the following positive features: - there is relatively little corruption. Some electoral fraud takes place in some areas but it is rare and usually detected. The secrecy of the ballot is virtually guaranteed. The counting of votes is carefully and thoroughly regulated. The conduct of elections is safeguarded by the electoral commission, which is independent of government - the constituency system ensures clear representation of citizens - elections usually produce a clear, decisive result - 2010 was a rare exception - elections are held on a regular basis and supposedly since 2011 when the fixed term parliament act was passed, all elections take place on fixed dates in the future. (This has not occurred due to government choice in the last five years where there have been three general elections) - UK elections are free in that it is relatively cheap and easy for any citizen to stand for election and virtually all adults are permitted to vote - Elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are based on roughly proportional lines so the outcome could be said to be fair to all parties - There is a freedom of information and of the media so that the voters have free access to independent information upon which they can base their choice

Answer 62

Uk elections suffer from the following negative features: - The FPTP system used for general elections and local elections in England and Wales is widely acknowledged to be unfair and unrepresentative. This means that many votes are wasted and votes are of an unequal vote - Small parties find it difficult to gain a foothold because of the electorate system in england - Uk general elections produce governments that do not enjoy the support of a majority of the electorate. In recent elections, the winning party had failed to achieve 40% of the popular vote

Answer 63

The nature of elections and the nature of government are very different things. Voters are choosing from a selection of candidates but are really deciding which party they prefer and who will form a government. That is usually the main concern of voters when they enter a polling booth. The problem is up to 60% of them will not the get the government they voted for But elections in the Uk have been proved to be effective in producing strong and stable governments at all levels. This though, is beginning to charge. In Scotland and wales, no majority has emerged in the 2016 elections. Before 2019, the previous three general elections in 2010, 2015, 2017 failed to produce a government with a decisive majority and twice with no majority at all. This may lead us to the conclusion that the traditional link between FPTP and single party government has been broken

Answer 64

If the UK were to adopt PR for local and national elections, the country would have to get used to the idea of multi party government. This might also mean an unstable government - The experience of the coalition government in 2010-15 is mixed. It was a table and lasted 5 years with few major defeats in parliament but there was also concern the junior coalition partner, the liberal democrats did not have the sufficient influence, so the government was still dominated by one party - The evidence that voters were unhappy with the experience of coalition, two party government is that they turned decisively against the liberal democrats by defeating them in all but 8 seats Even so it is difficult to judge the real level of support for small parties because so many voters do not support them as they fear it will be a wasted vote

Answer 65

Despite the success in the last decade of the conservative party at general elections, there has been a decline in support for the two largest parties over the last few decades and certainly there has been a rise in support for smaller parties like UKIP, the Brexit Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Green party Another way to consider this is to ask whether the Uk to political system is now pluralistic, with voters seeking parties that are more focused on their particular concerns - if this is the case, the two party system must be doomed irrespective of the electoral system On the other hand, voters may ultimately shrink away from a multi-party system and return to a preference for a two party choice How much choice do voters really want? If the Uk adopted PR for general elections, would more voters opt for smaller parties? As things stand, voters tend to be forced into voting either conservative or labour because any other vote would be 'wasted'. They are also sometimes forced to vote tactically, opting for their second choice in order to influence the outcome. Under PR, every vote counts and every vote is of equal value. With some systems, such as STV voters are even able to discriminate between candidates in the same party The lack of choice under FPTP, is quite stark but we do not need to ask whether voters want more choice, especially if greater choice leads to less stable governments

Answer 66

Tactical voting refers to when voters in Uk general elections feel that their first-choice vote will be wasted because it is for a party that has no chance of winning the constituency, they may change their vote to a second choice By doing this, they may have an influence on the outcome. Typically supporters of the liberal democrats or green party vote either labour or conservative because their first choice party cannot win the constituency. This is known as tactical voting

Answer 67

When voters were asked whether they wanted to change to the electoral system in the 2011 referendum, they rejected it decisively. This suggests that they prefer the status quo i.e, a two-party system underpinned by a plurality voting system. However, this may be an illusion. The alternative proposed was the alternative vote system (AV), which did offer more choice but was far the proportional. If the electoral were asked to choose between FPTP and a proportional system today, the answer might be different.

Answer 68

Positive arguments: - Elections allow the electorate to hold the outgoing government to account. There is a clear choice between the government and other parties - Elections create representative assemblies in an organized way and not at regular intervals. - There is widespread public confidence that elections in the UK are well regulated and that the outcomes are genuine expressions of the will of the people. - Under FPTP, elections usually produce strong and stable governments, with majorities in the House of Commons. - UK elections provide strong constituency representation so that voters are confident that there will be representation of their interests

Answer 69

Negative arguments: - Voters may feel that a vote for smaller parties is wasted, so the choice is not as wide as many appear to be the case - Referendums can also cause social rifts. This is arguably the case in both 2014 in Scotland and in 2016 in the EU referendum - There is a danger that the excessive use of referendums may undermine the authority of representative democracy. This has been a particular danger in some states in the US. - Under FPTP, elections produce majority governments that are supported by a minority of the electorate - While elections to devolved assemblies are generally proportional, elections to the west minister parliament are not proportional, exaggerating the popularity of large parties and discriminating against small parties.

Answer 70

absolute majority refers refers to the result of a vote where the winner receives more votes than all the other candidates put together. In other words, the winner receives at least 50% of the total votes.

Answer 71

- A constituency is a geographical area used to determine which people each elected representative represents. UK parliamentary constituencies are roughly 75,000 voters in size. Constituencies in devolved systems and local government are much smaller but also roughly equal in size. Elected representatives are expected to look after the interests of their constituency.

Answer 72

FPTP is the name commonly used to describe the UK’s electoral system for general elections, although its more formal title is ‘plurality in single member constituencies’

Answer 73

government by consent refers to the idea, developed by liberal theorists, that government must enjoy the consent of the people who are to be governed. This also implies that the people must show consent to how they are governed and what system of government they should be.

Answer 74

majority government refers A government whose members and supporters constitute a majority of the members of the legislature (e.g. The House of Commons or Scottish Parliament). This means they find it relatively easy to pass legislation and tends to make the stable and long lasting.

Answer 75

minority governments refers to a government whose members and supporters do not constitute a majority of members. In other words, there are more opposition supporting members than government supporting members. Such a minority government finds it difficult to pass legislation and is likely to be unstable and short lived.

Answer 76

plurality is the term which refers refers to the result of an election where the winner only has to obtain more votes than any of their opponents. It does not mean that the winner has an absolute majority.

Answer 77

Proportional representation (PR) refers to any electoral system that tends to produce a proportional outcome. In other words, the seats in a representative body are awarded in an election broadly in the same proportion as the votes cast for each party. An example would be if a party wins 40% of the votes it will be awarded approximately 40% of the seats available. The regional list system and single transferable vote system are good examples of PR.

Answer 78

referendums refers to a vote, which may be national, regional or local, in which qualified voters are asked a single question about a proposal where the answer is either yes or no. National referendums are not legally binding on Parliament or government, but it is unthinkable that their outcome would be ignored.

Answer 79

safe seats refer to a constituency where it is highly unlikely that the seat will change hands from one party to another at an election.

Answer 80

tactical voting refers to when voters in UK general elections feel that their first-choice vote will be wasted because it is for a party that has no chance of winning the constituency, they may change their vote to a second choice. By doing this they may have an influence on the outcome. Typically, supporters of the Liberal Democrats or Green Party vote either Labour or Conservative because their first-choice party cannot win the constituency. This is known as tactical voting.

Answer 81

In recent decades FPTP itself has come under increasing criticism for the notable flaws that it has. The criticisms have been sharper since the introduction and successful use of other systems in the UK: • The additional member system (AMS) in Wales and Scotland and the London Assembly * The single transferable vote (STV) in Northern Ireland * The supplementary vote (SV) for London mayors

Answer 82

During the AV referendum in 2011 Prime Minister at the time, Davis Cameron, protested that ‘Britain is in real danger of exchanging an electoral system that works for one we would come to regret profoundly.”

Answer 83

Accountability refers to Literally, being held responsible for your actions. In a political sense, citizens judge their elected representatives for their policies, votes and actions over their time in office.

Answer 84

ELECTIONS IN THE UK: - give the opportunity for citizens for citizens to cast a vote for their elected representatives - a feature of liberal and representative democracy - a way in which governments are both held accountable and chosen ELECTORAL SYSTEM: - a process by which the votes cast can be translated into elected officials or seats - a variety of systems are available, broadly falling into three types - proportional, plurality and majoritarian PARTY SYSTEM: - the number of parties that have a realistic chance of forming a government - a result of the electoral process that is chosen, not a choice in itself

Answer 85

To understand why elections are features of liberal and representative democracies it is important to understand what holding an election is meant to achieve. 1- Holding the current elected representatives to account An election allows for the current office holders to be judged on their performance over the time they have been in office. For most UK elected offices, this is either a 4- or 5-year term. This ensures that there are consequences for an elected official for the decisions and actions they take while in office, most importantly that they can be voted out if their representatives are unhappy. This should ensure that there is clear communication between officials and voters, as ensuring they feel represented and happy is the only way to ensure re-election. 2 -Choosing an elected representative and government In all the elections in the UK voters are choosing politicians to represent their views. Candidates will campaign either on their personal beliefs and policies, or if a member of a party, on the policies in their parties’ manifesto. By winning an election this person has a mandate to act on behalf of those who voted. In most UK elections, the lections of the individuals lead to the formation of a government, usually by a party that won a majority of seats in that election. Failing this, a number of parties may choose to work together, forming a coalition in order to govern. 3- Legitimising political power A government formed as a product of a free and fair election is a ‘legitimate government’. This means that it has the right to exercise power and authority over an area and the people within it. When such a government introduces a new policy, or changes an old one, it has the right to do so, having won an election. 4-Limiting the power of elected representatives Not only do elections legitimise a government, they also serve to limit it. Part of the limitations placed on the government is knowing that it will face election again in five years. Elections also result un the election of representatives who do not form a government. These are still legitimately elected officials and they form the opposition. They can use this position to scrutinise and challenge the government’s policies. 5- Development of political policy As part of an election, most parties or candidates publish a manifesto. This is a document outlining the policies the party will implement if elected. Public opinion through the election can shape these policies, and ultimately the winner of an election is usually chosen on these policies. During the 2017 general election, the Conservative Party advanced a policy that would require people to sell their homes to pay for social care in their old age. This was dubbed the ‘dementia tax’ by those opposed to it. Such was the public outcry surrounding the policy that the Conservative Party abandoned it during the election campaign, demonstrating the public influence over the party policy. 6-Selection of a political elite In the UK parties can decide who runs in an election under their party name. They choose those they think most likely to win elections and be successful as elected officials. Once all the elected representatives are chosen, some of these will be included in the formation of a government. This political elite is then responsible for the smooth running of a country; the election provides an opportunity to ensure they are capable and competent in doing so.

Answer 86

Majoritarian system: A majority is 50% +1 to win. This may refer to the number of votes needed to win a seat, or it may refer to the number of seats needed to forma government. It is likely to produce a two-party system Example system: Supplementary vote (SV)

Answer 87

Plurality system: A plurality of votes is having more votes than anyone else, thus winning but not having an overall majority. In a plurality system no majority is required to win a seat. It is likely to produce a two-party system Example system: FPTP

Answer 88

Proportional system: A proportional system allocates seats in a manner whish roughly reflects the % of votes gained by a party. No purely proportional systems are used in the UK, but a number of systems used are more proportional than FPTP. It is likely to produce a multi-party system. Example systems: - Additional Member System (AMS) - Single Transferrable Vote (STV)

Answer 89

YES - Recent elections demonstrate that FPTP is no longer even fulfilling the traditional strengths that it promised, such as a strong, single party government - FPTP produces a poor result regardless of your view, its lack of proportionality is increasingly evident, and this does not fit with the principles of representative democracy, and it does not deliver either MPs or a government with a majority of votes cast - The government that it does deliver can be argued to lack legitimacy and yet possess huge power: what Lord Hailsham referred to as ‘an elected dictatorship’. Even governments with small majorities have been able to push through policy with little regard to the opposition view. - The inequality in voter value across the UK does not fit with the principle of ‘one person, one vote’ and is not going to be remedied simply by moving constituency boundaries. - Beyond this inequality, many votes are wasted, meaning they have little or no impact on the electoral outcome. This undermines legitimacy, encourages tactical voting and may discourage turnout, all of which undermine democratic principles. - The two-party system represents a lack of true competition in UK elections, which undermines liberal and pluralist democratic principles. The only accountability that voters can often exercise is to choose the other major party which is not a great deal of choice.

Answer 90

NO : - It is widely understood by the public, not just in terms of how the ballot works, but also how the winner of an election is calculated. As a result of this, an educated public is more likely to turn out to vote, which improves the legitimacy of the resulting government. - The governments that it has produced are usually strong and stable. The 2010 coalition lasted for the full term of parliament. - It is possible for smaller parties to do well, as the SNP demonstrated in 2015 and 2019, while at the same time it can keep parties with more extreme political views out of office. While UKIP gained nearly 4m votes, it only won one seat in 2015. However, its impact has been through moving the Conservatives more to the right and major parts of the mainstream party becoming more Eurosceptic. This, some would argue, allows the best of both worlds. - The clear choice of voters ina two party system, and the likelihood of a single party government, make it easier for the voters to hold a government to account simply by voting for the other major party - Proportional systems weaken or remove the link between geographical areas and the people who represent them, which is a key feature of FPTP. This link allows for effective local representation of the whole of the UK in Parliament Given the successful use of other systems across the UK and the drawbacks of FPTP in the 21st Century, there have been growing questions over whether the FPTP system should be replaced for UK general elections. Although a referendum on the issue was held in 2011, it only gave the public choice between FPTP and the alternative vote (AV). AV is similar to SV except voters can express more than two preferences and instead of eliminating all but the top two candidates, the bottom candidate is eliminated one at a time until one person has a majority. While the public voted against the proposal this does not mean they rejected the idea of electoral reform outright, but rather rejected AV. After two more contentious elections in 2015 and 2017, the questions over FPTP have not gone away.

Answer 91

YES: - They can encourage education and participation, as shown in the Scottish independence and Brexit referendums, which enhances legitimacy and consent in the political system - They have provided a clear answer to political issues and the results have been implemented, such as the creation of devolved bodies. - They have enhanced liberal democracy by serving as a way of limiting the power of government. - The management of referendums is overseen by the independent Electoral Commission in the same manner as elections. This limits government manipulation of them. - They have enhanced representation in the UK by allowing popular sovereignty to be directly expressed. - As an accepted constitutional convention, they provide another way in which the public can engage in politics between elections and ensure a responsive government with a mandate to act. - As referendums are advisory, Parliament remains sovereign and can implement the decision in an effective manner. Although the public voted to leave the EU, Parliament decides on the manner of the withdrawal.

Answer 92

NO : - Turnout for some referendums has been low, such as the AV referendum, which undermines the legitimacy of the decision and the effectiveness of direct democracy. - Close results can be more divisive rather than settling an issue, as seen in Brexit and Scottish independence referendums - The campaigns surrounding some referendums have been misleading raising questions over the legitimacy of the result - They have undermined representative democracy in the UK, challenging key principles of the ‘trustee model’ in which elected representatives act in the best interests of the electorate on the basis of the consent given at an election - The issues raised are often complex, with voters lacking the necessary information to make a fully informed decision and the question being too complex to reduce to a yes or no choice. - The government decides when and if to call a referendum, which concentrates power in the government rather than limiting it. - Parliamentary sovereignty is undermined in reality as having offered a referendum there is a lot of political pressure for the government to honour the will of the people.