Electoral systems

FPTP representation

FPTP representation

Pros:

• strong MP-constituency link

• 2 party system enables accountability

Cons:

• Extremely under representative

2005 - Labour won 355 seats with 35% of vote

2015 - UKIP 12.5% of vote with only 1 seat, Try majority with only 36.8%

1983 - SDP-Liberal alliance 25% of votes by 23 seats

• distribution of support as important as strength

Disadvantage to have diluted support (UKIP/LD), but also to have to concentrated support (Labour in Knowsley)

Wrong winner in 1951 and 1974

Fluctuations in support not reflected in seat fluctuations (Thatcher 1983, may 2017)

FPTP participation

Pros:

• simple, quick and easy to understand

Cons:

• limited voter choice (only 1 vote)

• Safe seats

• Tactical voting

FPTP/SV government formation

Pro:

• strong and stable government with strong mandate (Blair/thatcher)

• Keeps out extremists (UKIP/BHP)

Cons:

• Coalitions = healthy democracy?

SV representation

Pros:

• MP-constituency link

• Theoretically requires majority (But Khan only Mayor to receive majority in 2016)

Cons:

• Not proportional

• Would keep 2 party system (38/41 PCCs from Lab/Con 2021)

SV participation

Pros:

• Simple and easy

• Positive campaigning (2nd choice)

• Fewer wasted votes

• No tactical voting in R1

Cons:

• safe seats remain (albeit reduced)

• Votes still wasted if neither choice reach 2nd round

• tactical voting in R2

AMS representation

Pros:

• retains constituency link

• Extremely proportional results (ScotCons - 23% of seats with 23% of votes)

Cons:

• 2 types of representative

• ‘Overhang seats’ - even when regional top-ups added, party still over represented

• Issues with FPTP kept on local level

• Fewer seats per region = disproportionate (e.g., welsh labour majority with >40% of votes)

AMS participation

Pros:

• 2 toes means greater choice

• Multi-party system

• Less votes wasted

Cons:

• only 46% turnout in 2021 Welsh assembly election tactical split ticket voting (Alba)

• Confusing

AMS government formation

Pros:

• Majorities possible (Wales 2021, Scotland 2011)

• Coalitions = healthy democracy

Cons:

• less strong/stable (fewer majorities)

• Doesn’t keep out extremists

STV representation

Cons:

• highly proportional (Sein Fein 2022 - 29% of votes, 30% of seats)-party or petition

• Lag

• Retains local representation

• Greater voter choice (ability to prioritise candidates from same party)

• Better representation for small parties

Cons:

• Proporitonally depends on consituancy size

• Multi-ember constituencies may weaken MP-constituency link

• Intra-part competition

• Large constituencies = disconnected voters

STV participation

Pros:

• greater voter choice

• Fewer wasted votes

• No safe seats/tactical voting

• Less negative campaigning

Cons:

• alphabetical voting

• Large ballot paper is confusing

• Often only last batch of votes used to transfer surplus (unfair)

STV government formation

Pros:

• Coalitions healthy (particularly suited to Northern Ireland)

Cons:

• majorities very unlikely

• Doesn’t keep out extremists

Impact of electoral reform for devolved regions - representation

• greater representation for small parties (e.g., Scottish greens - 8 seats)

• SNP won 49% of seats in 2021 with 45% of vote

• Artificial majorities due to small regions in wales (welsh labour only 36% of regional vote)

• Mixed-Faction representation

Impact of electoral reform for devolved regional - participation/choice

• SV allows greater choice (25% voted for candidates other than Bailey or Kahn in mayoral elections)

• AMS allows separate party/candiate vote - parties like Scottish greens thrive on list votes

• STV gives great choice in NI, but more spoilt ballots (1.27%)

Impact of electoral reform for devolved regions - Government formation

• Majorities have formed under AMS (e.g., Welsh Labour) - strong stable government

• More legitimate mandates

• Power sharing government collapse in Stromont (Instability of PR)

Refurendum - should be used

• empowers electorate to directly decide on policy

• Inform and engage electorate (72% turnout in Brexit ref, 84.6% turnout indyref)

• Settle long-standing constitutional disputes (AV)

Refurendum - shouldn’t be used

• undermines parliamentary sovereignty -parliament must fulfil promises of other politicians (e.g., Johnson and Brexit)

• Electorate can be misled to arguably make decisions against own interest (Brexit)

• Too regular use may result in fatigue (lower turnout in Brexit ref in Scotland)

• Same Question may be asked until desired answer reached (e.g., devolution refurendums)

• Enables leaders to manipulate political agenda