essay plan - evaluate the view that FPTP should be replaced by a proportional electoral system in UK general elections

Introduction

- FPTP is arguably the most significant electoral system in British politics, as it is used in the UK for general and local elections
- Proportional electoral systems in the UK are used in devolved bodies such as elections to the NIA through STV and part of the hybrid system of AMS
- It could be argued that FPTP is not fit for use in UK general elections due to it's disadvantages
- HOWEVER it could be argued that the other electoral systems used in the UK are less suitable for general elections, and are more suited to their purposes for example in devolved bodies
- Therefore this essay therefore will argue that FPTP shouldn't be replaced by a proportional electoral system in UK general elections

Votes equal seats (For PR)

- PR voting systems tends to be more representative of smaller parties as voters cast numerous votes (AMS) and are able to rank their preferences (STV)
- It also better reflects the development of multiparty politics in the UK, STV delivers proportional outcomes and ensures that votes are largely of equal value, as votes cast directly translate into seats
- For example, in the 2017 NI Assembly election, DUP won 28% of the vote and 28 seats
- This ensures that voters are not disillusioned by the prospect that the party they are voting for (minor party) has no chance in electoral success

Votes equal seats (Against PR)

- HOWEVER it could be argued that an advantage of FPTP is that whilst it excludes smaller parties, it does effectively keep out extremist parties such as UKIP and the BNP
- Parties on the far right and far left in British politics have not prospered in the UK due to FPTP making it difficult for smaller parties to gain consistent electoral success
- For example, whilst the support for UKIP in 2015 was strong - they received the fourth most votes - they failed to win any seats in the HOC
- Therefore it may be argued that FPTP is better than proportional representation alternatives HOWEVER it is important that minor parties are not excluded from the political system in order for a pluralist democracy. Despite this, it could be argued that it is more important to protect the principles of democracy by excluding extremist parties from positions of governance

Multi-party government (For PR)

- STV results in a government that has at least 50% of the votes, meaning that the actions of government have greater legitimacy, which is essential for a representative democracy
- STV also promotes coalition governments, which is important in areas such as Northern Ireland due to permitting a power-sharing government in the traditionally conflicted country between unionists and nationalists
- The likelihood of the formation of a coalition government, which is less likely under FPTP (there is the exception of the 2010-2015 Conservative and Lib Dem coalition), could be considered a positive feature of proportional representation as it allows for a pluralist democracy where minority views are included in key decision making

Multi-party government (Against PR)

- HOWEVER FPTP favouring the established parties and giving the winning party an additional bonus of seats (winners bonus) tends to result in a strong and stable government
- Single party governments with majorities can exercise significant control over the legislative process and they can fulfil their mandate by enacting the policy commitments they made in their manifestos and can decisively act during times of crisis
- For example, COVID, in which the governing party had a majority that allowed them to act decisively

Voter choice (For PR)

- Voters have greater choice under PR than FPTP. AMS allows for split ticket voting, when voters can select a candidate of one party to vote for, and a different party for their party list vote. In STV, voters rank candidates in order of preference
- This means that votes for minor parties are not likely to be wasted under PR systems, and this also eliminates tactical voting, which arguably is an undemocratic process and a symptom of the UK's democratic deficit

Voter choice (Against PR)

- HOWEVER the complexity of these systems and their mass of choice may make them difficult to understand for the average voter at GEs
- For example, the design of Scottish ballot papers were changed after the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections when nearly 150,000 ballots were filled out incorrectly
- Also, the constituency link under FPTP is more suitable for representation purposes, as one MP can effectively represent the interests of a single area. STV's multi-member constituencies weaken the constituency link, and under AMS, representatives are categorised into two. One has constituency duties and the other doesn't, which could create tensions in the legislative assembly

Conclusion

- To conclude, it is evident that FPTP is most suitable for UK GEs and local elections due to the simplicity of the system, it's ability to exclude extremist parties and a strong constituency link
- Whilst the other systems may be more suitable due to their ability to provide proportional representation, it could be argued that their use in devolved bodies is due to cultural and regional differences
- It must also be considered that support for electoral reform in the UK has been low, for example, the AV+ referendum in 2011 showed no will for change. Although there was low turnout for this referendum, showing that this may not be entirely representative of public opinion