Evaluate the extent to which STV/AV/AMS is a better fit as a voting system as opposed to FPTP. Flashcards
STV good
Provides a higher mandate for leading as opposed to FPTP systems. By removing other candidates and doing a second round of voting, the odds of a candidate reaching <50.1% increase.
STV good evidence
In 2021 Sadiq Khan went from 40.0% to 55.2% upon receiving the second round of votes - he earned a majority and hence a mandate to rule.
STV bad
Even though a mandate is achieved, it’s not created from people’s first choice and can appear unwarranted. Questionable applicability to a general election (clincher maybe). Smaller parties can have more power - weaker and slightly more unstable government.
STV bad evidence
Sadiq Khan only got 40% in 2021 for first votes, the ‘mandate’ came from those who wanted other leaders first -> almost an artificial inflation of votes in a sense. In the following election in 2024 with no second round Khan got 43.8% of the vote -> no mandate.
STV Evidence
Overall while STV does provide a higher mandate in actuality this mandate is inflated and without STV, arguably the outcome would be exactly the same as individuals would vote for who they think would win rather than who they would like to win. (subject to change dependent on the essay question -> don’t focus too much on the clincher above).
AMS for point
Strong and stable government created, not as strong as FPTP but this shortcoming is made up for in the ability to proportionally represent different views to a degree. Wasted votes do not occur to the same standard as pure FPTP.
AMS for point evidence
2021 Scottish GE, SNP came out with 64 seats which is one away from a majority, arguably strong and stable to more of an extent than other more PR based systems. Furthermore, Tories gained 31 seats where 29 of them came from the PR aspect of AMS. Indicates the best of both approach.
AMS against point
Doesn’t create government as strong or stable as FPTP as the PR side holds it back in this aspect.
AMS against point evidence
Without the PR part, tories would have severely less influence due to only having 3 seats in 2021 election, this would also allow the SNP more power to create a strong and stable government.
AMS clincher
This can be argued either way depending on your essay.
One one hand you can say that overall AMS is good as it makes up for FPTPs shortcomings through a more proportional system.
It can also be said that it sacrifices the strong and stable government upheld by FPTP.
AV for
AV Removes any need for tactical voting as you are able to vote for the candidate or party you believe in the most strongly even if they have little chance of winning, while still voting for the party you believe is most likely to win. EG voting for green first then labour second.
AV evidence (needs filling in)
AV against
Donkey voting- People who rank the candidates based on the order they appear on the sheet. Gives people at the top an advantage.
Voters are forced to put all candidates on list, they may only care about the first two so just list the rest off in no particular order
AV against evidence (needs filling in)
AV against clincher
Overall, while it does have merit, the lack of use the system has is a testament to the drawbacks and complications associated with the system. Relate back to the question from here.
