ETVT FPTP should be replaced with a more proportional system in UK general elections (DA)

T1 – Government (DA)
Favour Proportional =

Decisive maj sacrifice proportionality and fair repttn.

2024 Labour 34%-63% widest disparity due to winners bonus creates less legitimate elective dictatorship.

2015 UKIP 14%-1SEAT. ERS says under STV = 54 seats, more proportional = more representative.

2026 Scottish Elections, SNP dominated FPTP, but Reform/Greens had 17/13 seats from top up, significant as without there is only 2 seats between them.

FPTP undermines dem legitimacy by distorting pop vote (winners bonus). Smaller parties excluded, leads to wasted votes (low legitimacy).

Favour FPTP

Creates single party maj, decisive and stable.

2019 GE: CON 80 seat maj on 44% vote, powerful mandate enabled Johnson to break Brexit deadlock, pass EUW act 2020. Compared to

STV in NI, creates politically opposite coalition govs (2017 28 DUP // 27 SF) makes hard to pass meaningful legislation, westminster has to intervene.

FPTP avoids stagnation & fragmentation of plurality. Allows to last full terms (stability). Winners bonus helps party fulfil manifesto commitments,

e.g. Blair 1997 179 seat majority allowed for major consti reforms (devolution) entirely opposed by CON.

Helps avoid extremist parties from gaining seats e.g. BNP 2010 564,000 votes

Overall =

For democracy, Stability > Proportionality.

T2 – Voter Choice (DA)
Favour Proportional =

FPTP voter choice limited (vote for 1 party doesn’t reflect everyone’s political prefs).

AMS in Scotland can vote for split ticket (FPTP & PR list). Don’t have to tactical vote for desired outcome, compared to GE (MakeVotesMatter say 20% voted tactically 2024).

PR votes much less likely to be wasted, greater pol autonomy reduces dem def, theoretically inc ptcptn (Scotland matches GE despite being less important election).

Favour FPTP =

Lesser FPTP choice beneficial, easier to understand, makes politics accessible.

Reflected in lower turnouts, greater choice makes more confusing for voters (Westminster/Senedd, 2019/2021, 67%/46%)

Spoiled ballots in 2015 GE 0.3% // 2017 NI AE 3%. Increase by factor of 10, undermines legitimacy.

Proportional methods can also lead to wasted votes e.g. 2026 Scottish Election, SNP only gained 1 seat from 600k regional votes, if people understood system (d’Hondt discriminates against winning parties), they could have used vote more impactfully on ideologically similar party e.g. Scottish Greens.

FPTP SMCs make local links easier compared to preset regional list in MMCs e.g. Creasy (MP Walthamstow) newsletter demonstrates close link to constituents. Simplicity makes campaigning more relevant, reps benefit more than those in MMCs.

Overall =

PR greater choice undermined by complexity, risks greater spoils + voter/rep disconnect. FPTP removes barriers to voting.

CCLN =

Reforming FPTP risks stability, connection. FPTP operates efficiently, mainly detriments extreme parties (inherently threaten stability).