Electoral Systems (P1) Flashcards
Where is FPTP used? (4)
General, Mayoral, Police and Crime commisioner, Local councils in England and Wales
Where is STV used? (2)
Northern Irish Assembly, Scottish and Northern Irish local councils
Where is AMS used? (3)
Scottish Parliament, Welsh Parliament, London Assembly
How does SV work?
Choose first and second choice, if a majority is recieved them they are elected, if not then second choice is used for top two candidates - Majoritarian System
Adv and Disadv of SV?
Adv:
-Relatively Simple
-More voter choice
-Reduced tactical voting
Disadv:
-Only one candidate
-Can entrench two-party system more
-Winner may not be first choice
How does STV work?
elected in multi-member constituencies, voters rank candidates who must reach a quota, surplus is transferred to second choice etc. Proportional system
Adv of STV?
Cooperation and representation:
Power sharing agreements ended ‘The Troubles’ in NI (2024 reinstated after gov deal on Windsor Framework), Scot local 22’ 94% no overall control compared to 38% in 2003 under FPTP
How does AMS work?
one vote cast for FPTP style constituency member, one for a party for regional member (closed party list) that gives ‘additional members’ from those unfairly represented under FPTP
What type of system is AMS?
hybrid between FPTP (plurality) and regional list (proportional)
Disadv of STV
Potential conflict:
NI suspended 6 tomes since 1998, 2022 Sinn Fein won and DUP refused power-share over Windsor Framework
How can minor parties be shown to be disadvantaged through FPTP?
2015 - UKIP 13% vote, 1 seat
2024 - Reform 14% vote, 5 seats
2024 - SNP 30% vote, 9 seats
Greens would have had 38 seats instead of one under AMS IN 2019
Adv of AMS?
Proportional (more representative) and greater choice for voters
Examples of AMS being more representative due to proportionality
1999 Cons won 0 constituency MPs despite 15% vote, won 18 additional members compared to UKIPs 13% and one seat under FPTP in 2015
Examples of AMS giving greater choice to voters
‘Split ticket’ vote: 2021 Scottish Parl Greens won 1.2% constituency but 8% additional votes to gain 8 seats, can vote tactically under FPTP then their actual support
Disadvantages of AMS
Bias to constituency members, so not always enough seats for additionals, 2021 Senedd (Welsh) Greens won 1.6% vote and 4.4% party list votes but no seats
Adv of FPTP
-Speed and simplicity
-Strong, single party
-Properly addresses voter issues through winner (2019 Brexit)
-Excludes extremists
-Strong MP constituency link
Examples for FPTP speed and simplicity
PM resumes office day after election, while 2007 Holyrood election took two weeks for SNP/Libdem
Examples for strong, single party with a clear mandate under FPTP
19/21 gov single party
Thatchers privatisation in 80s after 339 seats won and Blairs constitutional reforms (HoL and HRA) after 418 seats won
Examples for FPTP excluding extremist parties
BNP won 2% in 2010 but no higher than 3rd in any constituency, but won 6.2% and 2 seats in European Parl in 2009 (proportional system)
Examples for strong MP-constituency link under FPTP
2022 33 Con MPs abstained on banning fracking, including Mark Fletcher who had a strong local movement against fracking
Disadv of FPTP
-Wasted votes (esp minor parties)
-Lack of voter choice
-Recent elections lack ‘strong single party’ proposed
Examples for wasted votes under FPTP
Winners bonus - 2019 Con 56% seats compared to 43.6% votes
-2021 Police and Crime commissioners elections, a third of winners were not backed by a majority of voters
Examples for lack of voter choice under FPTP
Two parties act as ‘broad churches’ so tactical voting encouraged, 32% voted tactically in 2019
Arguments against reforming FPTP
System arguably mandated from 2011 AV system with 68% voting against changing, 42% turnout
