Unit 1: Electoral Systems Flashcards
What are the four main elections in the UK?
- general elections
- devolved assembly elections (fixed term, every four years)
- European Parliament elections (fixed term, every five years)
- local elections, to district, borough and county council, and mayoral elections (fixed term, usually every four/five years)
What are the three main functions of elections?
- form governments
- ensure representation
- uphold legitimacy
How do elections carry out the representation function? [2]
- establish the constituency link
- establish general link between between the government of the day and public opinion
How do elections uphold legitimacy?
-the electorate providing ‘consent’ to be governed
In what two ways is the UK less successful in upholding legitimacy?
- low turnout levels since 2001 - may be part of the electorate withholding consent to be governed
- falling support for the governing parties since the 70s - may indicate declining satisfaction with the performance of the UK political system
What are the three main notions of representation?
- trusteeship/burkean representation
- the doctrine of the mandate
- descriptive reprensentation
What are two criticisms of Burkean representation, and how could the first be tackled?
- creates a gap between the views of ordinary citizens and the views of their representatives, representatives acting in own interest. -gap could be filled by shortening of electoral terms/introduction of of recall elections
- only applicable to limited number of situations, e.g. free votes, backbench revolts. MPs are more accountable to party
What are the main premises of the doctrine of the mandate? [3]
- by winning an election, a party gains a mandate to carry out manifesto policies
- the party, not individual politicians, carry out representation
- MPs serve their constituents by being loyal to their party, not thinking for themselves
What are the criticisms of the doctrine of the mandate theory of representation? [5]
- the electorate do not necessarily vote ‘rationally’ i.e.. on the basis of manifesto promises
- even if a vote is based on policy, it will never be in support of an entire manifesto, which weakens the mandate
- no way of forcing governments to carry out manifesto once elected, and some policies are often only included for votes
- it is unclear who the mandate falls to: party or PM. rise of presendentialism?
- not possible in event of a coalition as each manifesto is compromised
What would a government with descriptive representation be like?
A microcosm of society, containing members from all social groups in proportionate numbers
What are the criticisms of descriptive representation?
- no defence of broader public interest, as each member tries only to defend the interests of their group
- government would reflect society’s weaknesses as well as strength e.g. if majority of population were apathetic, poorly informed and poorly educated
- not reconcilable with electoral choice
Where is First Past The Post (FPTP) used [2] and what type of electoral system is it?
- House of Commons
- local government in England and Wales
-plurality system
Where is Additional Member System (AMS) used [3] and what type of electoral system is it?
- Scottish Parliament
- Welsh Assembly
- Greater London Assembly
-mixed system
Where is Single Transferable Vote (STV) used [2] and what type of electoral system is it?
- Northern Ireland Assembly
- local government in Northern Ireland and Scotland
Where is Supplementary Vote (SV) used and what type of electoral system is it?
- London mayoral elections
- majority system
Where is Alternative Vote (AV) used and what type of electoral system is it?
- local government by-elections in Scotland
- majority system
What is a majoritarian electoral system?
An electoral system that tends to over-represent larger parties and usually results in single-party government
What is a proportional electoral system?
An electoral system that tends to represent parties in line with their electoral support
How many constituencies are there in the UK?
-650
What are the implications of FPTP? [5]
- disproportionality
- systematic biases
- two-party system
- single-party government
- the landslide effect
What is meant by disproportionality as an implication of FPTP?
-the disparity between the actual number of votes for a party and the number of seats they win, e.g. 1974 when Labour formed a minority government as the largest party in the House of Commons despite having fewer votes than the Conservatives
What are the systematic biases of FPTP? [2]
- size of party
- distribution of support
Why do large parties benefit at the expense of small parties under FPTP? [3]
- ‘winner takes all’ effect - 100% of representation is gained in each constituency by a single candidate, and therefore a single party
- winning candidates tend to come from larger parties, nullifying third of fourth party votes
- voters are discouraged from supporting small parties because they know they are unlikely to win seats (wasted votes). some people vote for the ‘least bad’
Why is even distribution of support bad for small/’third’ parties?
They could win a significant proportion of votes nationwide but comes second or third in almost every seat, thus gaining less seats/power than their proportion of votes nationwide should give them
What percentage of votes and seats did the Liberal Democrats have in the 1983 and 2010 General elections?
- 1983 25.4% votes 3.5% seat
- 2010 23% votes 8.8% seats
How can the improving position of the Liberal Democrats be explained? [2]
- the ruthless targeting of borderline seats in electoral campaigns
- the growing tendency towards tactical voting
What is a marginal seat?
-a seat/constituency with a small majority, which is therefore ‘winnable’ by more than one party
What is a safe seat?
-a seat/constituency that is consistently won by the same party
What is the landslide effect?
-when support for the second major party dramatically declines, resulting in an artifical landslide majority for the other major party
Give a recent example of the landslide effect
-Labour 2001 - electoral support of 41% - parliamentary majority of 166 seats
Describe the Additional Member System (AMS) [5]
- a ‘mixed’ system made up of constituency and party-list elements
- a proportion of seats filled by FPTP using single-member constituencies (56% in Scotland and London, 66% in Wales)
- remaining seats filled with closed party-list system
- electors cast 2 votes, one for a candidate in a constituency election, the other for a party in a list election
- the party list ‘tops up’ the constituency results, ‘correctively’ achieving the most proportional outcome using the D’Hondt formula
What are the advantages of AMS? [2]
- its mixed character balances the need for constituency representation and electoral fairness
- it allows voters to make wider and more considered choices; they can vote for different parties in their two votes. They can vote for both their individual constituency representative and the party they want in government
What are the disadvantages of AMS? [3]
- single-member constituencies reduce the likelihood of high levels of proportionality
- creates confusion by having two classes of representative
- less effective constituency representation - larger constituency size, and not all reps have constituency duties
Describe how the 2007 Scottish Parliament outcome was ‘corrected’ by AMS
- Labour won 37 out of 63 constituency seats (j over half) with 32% of the overall vote
- the distribution of party-list seats gave it 36% of total seats
- this put Labour behind SNP
What are the main implications of proportional systems? [4]
- greater proportionality
- multiparty systems
- coalition or minority government
- consensus-building
Describe Single Transferable Vote (STV)
- multimember consituencies (NIA has 18 constituencies, 6 members each)
- parties can put up as many candidates as there are seats in each constituency
- electors vote preferentially by ranking
- candidates are elected if they achieve a quota of votes
- quota is calculated using the Droop formula
- quoata = (total number of votes cast/(number of seats to be filled + 1)) +1
- votes initially counted according to first preference. if any candidate achieves the quota additional votes for them are counted according to subsequent preferences
- if some seates are still unfilled, the candidate with the fewest votes drops out and their votes are redistributed according to subsequent preferenes
What are the advantages of STV?
- can achieve highly proportional outcomes
- competition amongst candidates from the same party mean they can be individually judged
- the availability of several representatives mean constituents can choose who to contact
What are the disadvantages of STV?
- degree of proportionality can vary
- single-party government unlikely
- multimember constituencies may be divisive for the party
How many votes and seats did UKIP gain in the 2005 General election, and how many seats do they have in the European Parliament?
- 600,000 votes
- 0 seats
- 13 seats
What is a closed party list?
-a version of the party list system where voters only vote for the party and not individual candidates
What is a minority government?
- a government that does not have overall majority support in the assembly/parliament
- minority governments are usually formed by single parties that can’t/don’t want to form coalitions
Describe Regional Party List
- large multimember constituencies
- for European Parliament UK is divided into 12 regions with 3-10 members each (72 in total)
- parties compile closed candidate list, in descending order of preference
- parties are allocated seats in direct proportion to their votes in each regional constituency
- seats are filled from party list
What are the advantages of Regional Party List? [3]
- the only potentially ‘pure’ system of PR, therefore fair to all parties
- tends to promote unity by encouraging electors to identify with a region rather than constituency
- makes it easier for woman and minority candidates to be elected provided they feature on the party list
What are the disadvantages of Regional Party List? [3]
- the existence of many small parties can lead to weak and unstable government
- the link between representatives and constituencies is weakened/broken
- parties become more powerful as they decided on order of party list
Describe Supplementary Vote (SV)
- single-member constituencies
- electors have 2 votes: first preference and supplementary vote
- winning candidate in election must gain a minimum of 50% of all votes
- votes counted according to first preference
- if no candidate reaches 50% the top two candidates remain and the other candidate’s supplementary votes are redistributed
Describe Alternative Vote (AV)
- single-member constituencies
- electors vote preferentially
- winning candidate must gain a minimum of 50% of the votes
- votes counted according to first preference
- if one candidate does not achieve 50%, the bottom candidate drops out and their subsequent preferences are redistributed until one candidate gains 50%
What are the advantages of AV and SV? [2]
- ensure that fewer votes are wasted than in FPTP
- as winning candidate requires more than 50% of the vote, a broader range of views and opinions influence the outcome. parties drawn towards centre ground
What are the disadvantages of AV and SV? [2]
- outcome may be determined by the preferences of supporters of small/extremist parties
- winning candidate may enjoy little first-preference support - only succeed on basis of redistributed supplementary vote. only least unpopular candidate
Which voting system was recommended by an independent commission in 1998, and was (falsely) promised a referendum? Why was a referendum never held?
- AV plus - AV topped up with party list
- Labour had proved they could still win under FPTP
What was the exact outcome of the 2010 AV referendum?
-68% ‘no’
What are five major arguments for the reforming of Westminster elections?
- electoral fairness - all votes having the same value. PR underpins the basic democratic principle of political equality
- no/fewer wasted votes (for second/third parties, and the winner’s surplus)
- majority government, rather than plurality government e.g. FPTP 2005 35% of the vote got Labour in
- accountable government - government forced to listen to Parliament as they need the support of more than one party
- consensus political culture - negotiation, consultation and comprimise instead of one-sidedness
What are five major argumetns against the refoming of Westminster elections?
- clear electoral choice between different government - few possible outcomes (however due to parties shifting towards the centre the distinction may not be so clear)
- constituency representation - people know exactly who represents their local interests (although this would not neccesarily be lost)
- strong government - it does not have to go through other parties, more efficient
- mandate democracy - coalition post-election deals are not endorsed by the electorate
- stable government - one party, idealogical unity
2010 election results for three main parties:
What does this tell us about their support?
- Conservatives: Seats - 46% Votes - 36% geographically concentrated support over represented
Labour: Seats - 39% Votes - 29% geographically concentrated over represented
Liberal Democrats Seats - 8.8% Votes - 23% evenly spread support under represented
What’s a two party system?
- two major parties dominate political system
- both parties have equal chance of winning government power
- usually alternations between the two time after time
- forms single party government with the other forming the opposition of ‘party in the wings’
- other parties exist but have low representative strength
What’s a multiparty system?
- more than two parties have equal chance of winning government power
- no two parties dominate
- usually forms collations and new administrations in between elections
- distinction between major and minor parties is harder to maintain and establish
examples of safe seats
- 2010 Knowsley (76% voted Labour)
- 2010 New Forest West (54% voted Conservative)
example of marginal seat
- High Peak (39% voted Labour, 36% voted Conservative)
