Evaluate the view that reforms to democracy in the UK haven’t gone far enough

For points

• most important reform is the reform of FPTP

• Extending the franchise further

• Greater use of direct democracy, like referendums

Against points

• FPTP leads to limited voter choice and can be unrepresentative, however does have advantages which leads to a lot of population supporting it

• Extending franchise to younger people may have little impact, as their turnout is consistently low

• Greater use of direct democracy wouldn’t improve democracy in the UK, instead challenge parliamentary sovereignty and effective working of representative democracy in the UK

FOR: replacing FPTP, answer, evidence, conclusion

• answer

• FPTP is criticised because of its lack of proportionality, limited voter choice and unfair distribution of seats in elections

• Evidence

• FPTP is unrepresentative

• MP’s often win without majority support in their constituencies

• Nationally, votes aren’t translated into seats accurately

• Disadvantages minor parties

• FPTP favours parties with geographically concentrated support, under representing minor parties

• Example: in 2019, Lib Dem’s won 11.5% of the vote but just 1.7% of seats (11/650)

  • Under a fully proportional system, would have won 75 seats

• Winners bonus effect

• The largest party is disproportionally rewarded, even without majority support

  • 2024, Labour won a 174 seat majority with just 33.7% of the vote

• Limited voter choice

• Voters can only pick one candidate, this reduces the ability to express nuanced political preferences

  • AMS, in contrast allows a split ticket vote

• Wasted votes and tactical voting

• Votes for losing candidates are effectively “wasted” discouraging participation

• Many voters feel forced into tactical voting- choosing a less preferred but more viable candidate to block an undesirable party

• Conclusion

• Replacing FPTP with a more proportional system would increase fairness, improve representation and give voters greater choice

  • This would make UK democracy more legitimate and inclusive

Against : replacing FPTP, answer, evidence, conclusion

• answer

• FPTP, despite criticism, offers stability, simplicity and strong local representation, this explains why a majority of voters support it

• Evidence

• Public support for FPTP

• 2011 Alternative vote referendum, 68% voted against changing the system, shows FPTP is supported

• Simple and efficient system

• FPTP is easy for voters to understand, can only choose one candidate

• Election results are known quickly, ensuring a swift and stable transfer of power

  • 2024, first result was announced at 23:15 and kier starmer became prime minister by 12:40 PM the next day

• strong MP constituency link

• Each MP represents a specific geographic area, ensuring local accountability and effective representation

• Maps regularly hold surgeries and respond to constituency concerns

• Evidence of MP constituency responsiveness

• Dec 5th, 2023, 22 conservative mos rebelled against their party to support victims of the infected blood scandal, shows MPs are influenced by local movements and constituents concerns

• MP Caroline Nokes defied her party to advocate for victims in her Romney and Southampton north constituency

• Conclusion

• FPTP remains popular, simple and ensures strong local representation, calls for reform overlook these benefits, suggests major changes may not be necessary

Judgement - FPTP reform

• though MP-constituency link and ease of use definitely are benefits of FPTP

  • Benefits outweighed by fact FPTP has limited voter choice and is highly unrepresentative

• In area of electoral systems, reforms to democracy in the UK therefore haven’t gone far enough

  • Replacing FPTP with a more proportional system would greatly improve democracy in the UK

FOR: extending franchise (answer, evidence and conclusion)

• Answer

• Turnout in UK elections is quite low, and extending the franchise or introducing compulsory voting could enhance democracy

• Evidence

• Low turnout rates

• 2019 GE: 67.3% turnout

• 2024 GE: 59.9% turnout

• Lowering the voting age to 16 and 17

• Supported by Labour Party in 2024, hasn’t been implemented yet

• Youth engagement in politics is increasing, especially through social media and movements like Fridays for future (climate strikes)

• Scottish elections, 16-17 already have the vote, has boosted political participation

• 16-17 year olds have other legal responsibilities, like working, leaving school and joining the armed forces- so should be able to vote

• Compulsory voting

• Countries like Australia have 90%+ turnout due to compulsory voting

• Would force politicians to engage with all voters, leading to more representative policies

• Encourages people to see voting as a civic duty, increasing long term engagement

• Conclusion

• Extending franchise and introducing compulsory voting would improve UK democracy,

• Would make elections more representative and participatory

Against: extending franchise, answer, evidence and conclusion

• answer

• Valid concerns about lowering voting age to 16 and introducing compulsory voting, questioning whether these reforms would actually strengthen democracy

• Evidence

• Votes at 16- key issues

• Low turnout among young voters: 18-24 year olds already have low participation, so little evidence for 16-17 year olds would engage more

• Many lack political knowledge and would require better political education before given vote

• Some legal rights at 16 are limited in practice, shows they’re still considered minors, few in full time employment, can’t be deployed to the front line until 18

• Compulsory voting key issues

• Undemocratic - voting should be a choice not an obligation

• Doesn’t fix root causes of voter disengagement

  • Which are political apathy, distrust in politicians

• In preferential voting systems, like STV, people may rank candidates randomly instead of making informed choices

• Wouldn’t stop parties focusing only on marginal seats, neglecting safe seat voters

• Conclusion

• Extending the franchise and making voting compulsory wouldn’t necessarily improve democracy,

• as they fail to address the core issues behind political disengagement

Judgement for extending franchise

• low turnout in UK elections in 21st century are significant problem for UK democracy

• Reforming franchise by introducing votes at 16 and compulsory voting would therefore improve democracy in the UK and should be introduced, as they would improve turnout, political awareness and the degree to which parliament is representative of the population

For: more use of direct democracy, answer, evidence and conclusion

• answer

• Greater use of referendums and citizen assemblies could strengthen democracy by directly involving public in key decisions and holding politicians accountable

• Evidence

• Referendums have high turnouts compared to GE’s this shows public engagement

  • 2014 Scottish independence referendum-84.6% turniut

  • 2016-EU referendum 72.2% turnout

• Act as a check on “elective dictatorships” which prevents govts from making major constitutional changes without public approval

• Increase political awareness- 2014 Scottish independence referendum encouraged debate on independence, trident and economy

• Citizens assemblies can enhance democracy by involving ordinary people in decision making

  • 2019 climate assembly UK helped shape policies, like accelerating the ban on petrol/diesel cars and increasing renewable energy capacity

  • This suggests citizens assemblies should be used more to reflect public opinion on important issues

• Conclusion

• Expanding referendum and citizens assemblies could make the UK more democratic by increasing public participation and trust in decision making

Against: more use of direct democracy, answer, evidence and conclusion

• answer

• Expanding direct democracy could undermine parliamentary sovereignty and the effectiveness of representative democracy

• Evidence

• Referendums can be politically motivated, rather than purely democratic

  • 2016 brexit referendum, partly held to stop conservatives from losing votes to UKIP

  • 2011 AV referendum was influenced by backlash against the Lib Dem’s for their U turn on tuition fees

• Low turnout in some referendums raises concerns about legitimacy

  • 2011 AV referendum- only 42.2% turnout means results may not reflect true public opinion

• Citizens assemblies lack democratic legitimacy

  • Participants aren’t elected, making their influence questionable

  • Recommendations are often ignored or rejected by political opponents

• Conclusion

• Greater use of referendums and citizens assembles could weaken representative democracy

  • Makes decisions overly political, fails to engage whole population effectively

Judgement of more use of direct democracy

• Referendums on key constitutional issues are an important part of UK democracy

• greater use of referendums isn’t a reform that’s necessarily needed,

  • likely there would be low turnout for most referendums and political parties would call referendums for their own benefit

Overall argument (conclusion)

• reforms to democracy in the UK haven’t gone far enough,

• 2 most important failings of UK democracy are unrepresentative nature of FPTP system and low turnouts in elections in 21st century

• Extending franchise to 16-17 year olds, making voting compulsory and replacing FPTP with a more proportional voting system would improve democracy in the UK and should be introduced