UNIT 3 DIFFERENT ELECTORAL SYSTEMS Flashcards
FPTP
The UK is divided into 650 constituencies geographically, each with a roughly equal population. Each constituency will elect
one MP.
Voters cast a single vote by placing a cross next to the name of their preferred candidate.
FPTP is a simple plurality system – the person with the largest number of votes in a constituency is elected. The winner
does not have to gain an absolute majority of the votes cast.
(Absolute majority: This refers to the result where the winner receives more votes than all other candidates put together.
In other words, the winner receives at least 50% of the total votes.)
The party with the largest number of seats in the House of Commons (not necessarily a majority of the votes cast across
the country) has the right to form a government.
In 1951 and 1974, the party forming the govt secured fewer votes than the main opposition party suggesting that FPTP can
distort voters’ wishes. In 1951, the Conservatives won 321 seats despite having 200,000 votes fewer than the Labour party
nationwide!
Safe seat: A constituency where it is almost certain that the same party will win the seat at every general election. The
Electoral Reform Society estimates that 368 out of 650 were safe seats in 2015. In 2019, approximately 14 million voters
lived in seats which had voted for only one party since WW2.
Marginal seats: Marginal seats are those which are closely contested, and the result is in doubt. 141 were estimated as
marginal in 2019 (winning candidate led by 10% or less)
advantages of FPTP
fast results, the fastest seat being 2 hours simple for people to understand.
stable govt- even when not over 50%, forms high majority government = easy pass legislation and a long lasting stable govt.
less extremism- lack of geographical concentration so brit nat party barely wins seats, UKIP won 1 seat for 12% of vote.
link between MP and constituency- tend to hold surgeries in local area and constituency offices.
weakness of FPTP system
winners bonus
results in 2 main parties targetting marginal seats
win with less then 50 % of the vote
This means that in 226 constituencies in 2019, the winning party actually had fewer than half of people voting for them!
not as representative Third
parties find it hard to break through because their support
needs to be concentrated in a constituency and they are often
seen as a wasted vote. Voters often vote tactically as their party
will not win; e.g. a Conservative voter voting Lib Dem in a Lib-
Lab marginal to keep Labour out.
unequal votes Stephen Timms has a 33,000 seat majority! 70.8% of votes in 2019 were wasted because they went to non-elected officials or were surplus to what the elected MP needed
extremist parties are marginalised. Mainstream parties who
are threatened by extremists may take on their views, such as
the Conservatives moving to the right and taking an increasingly
hard line on immigration (e.g. Rwanda policy).
additional member system
voters get 2 votes, 1 for local candidate and 1 for constituincy list. Top up of additional memvers to make system more proportionate. used in scot and welsh parli elections and london assembly
weaknesses of additional member system
- still vote tactically on purple ballot
- more complicated and difficult system leads to confusion and longer time counting
- giving power to parties instead of voters= undemocratic (orange ballot). Relationship between regional and constituincy creates to 2 teirs of members of scot parli= increased confusion
strengths of additional memebrs
more proportaniate and fair better link between vote and seat share .
retains MP and constituincy link, smaller parties do better bc votes may be topped up
dont need to vote tactically on orange ballot
single transferrable vote
1 vote form of a ranked prefernce - choose up to as many candidates there are, rank in order, use this order to help work out vote share, Creates multiple candidates per constituency - must geta quota of first prefernces to be elected. 4 most popular are elected. Used in northern ireland and scot local elections
strengths of single transferrable vote
more proportionate, smaller parties get more of a say, less likely to get a 2 party system.
No tactical voting, all based on ranking
increased voted choice
weakness of single transferable vote
low preferences not be as strong help = apathy down the ballet
slow to count
more complex
less strong majority
need a larger constituency/ regions less representative and lower constutuency link
supplementary vote
1 vote, 2 prefernces. If candidate gets over 50% they win on the 1st round. Second round only the top 2 parties go through, and second preference gets redistrubuted
formerly used this sytem in london mayoral elections, other meyors and police and crime commissioners. 2021 Not used in 2024 and they went back to FPTP
STRENGTHS OF SUPPLAMENTARY VOTE
more voter choice= easier expression of preference for parties
50% = relatively strong majorities cant win first round with plurality of vote.
decrease tacticalvoting, less enthedid on voter mobilisation.
simple, eary to undersyand, quick to count less then FPTP but more then AMS and STV
weakness ofsupplementary vote
still get wasted votes and tactical voting
enforces 2 party state
How referendums have been used in the UK and their
impact on UK political life since 1997.
referendums have been used to solve political issues that divide countries (brexit, scot independence 2014 ), to advise govt on what the people want (dominic grieve views the brexit ref as advisory) and to prevent unpopular things being braught in (AV referendum, 29% )
for referendums
- They can encourage participation and education, 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 successfully implemented, such as the creation of devolved bodies
- They have enhanced liberal democracy by serving as a have way to limit the power of the government
- The management of referendums is overseen by the independent Electoral Commission in the same manner as elections. This limits government manipulation
- They have enhanced representation in the UK by allowing popular sovereignty to be directly expressed
against referendums
- Turnout for some referendums, such as the AV referendum, has been low, 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 the Scottish independence referendum
- The government decides if and when to call a referendum, which concentrates power in the government rather than limiting it
- They have undermined representative democracy in the UK, challenging key principles of the Burkean principle in which elected representatives act in the best interests of the electorate on the basis of the consent given at an election
he campaigns surrounding some referendums been misleading, raising questions over the legitimacy of the result
impact of using AMS as voting system
Proportional Voting and Government Outcomes:
Proportional systems like AMS typically result in coalition or minority governments unless one party secures a majority.
Single-party governments under AMS:
2016 London local elections.
SNP outright majority in Scotland (2011) after a minority government (2007-2011).
Wales: Labour has consistently governed but never had an outright majority (closest: 30/60 seats in 2021).
Government formation has generally been smooth, with limited uncertainty and minimal party division conflicts.
Voter Turnout Trends:
Initially low turnout in Scotland and Wales (1999), declined further in 2003, then improved in 2007.
Best turnout in Wales: 46% in the 2021 elections.
Small parties (below ~3% vote share) struggle to gain representation, especially in London.
Gender Representation:
AMS incentivizes gender balance in party top-up lists.
Female representation:
35% in the Scottish Parliament.
36% in the London Assembly.
40% in the Welsh National Assembly.
Voting and Public Perception:
Constituency and list voting under AMS are simple for citizens to understand.
Early concerns about neglecting list votes diminished; by 2008 onwards, list voting became more popular.
AMS results are straightforward to count, with high public acceptance and legitimacy.
Representation and Voter Choice:
AMS maintains a direct relationship between voters and constituency representatives.
Regional list representatives, often from different parties, compete with constituency members.
Voters have enhanced choice: they can approach their constituency representative or any regional list member.
