Evaluate The Argument That The FPTP Electoral System Should Be Scrapped And Replaced With A More Proportional Electoral System.

Introduction

• First Past The Post is the current electoral system used for UK Parliament elections and local council elections in England and Wales.

• It is a simple plurality system

• the system has come under particular scrutiny lately as the Gallagher Index, rated the 2024 General Election the least proportional election

Paragraph Focus

• Para 1 = FPTP vs Representation

• Para 2 = FPTP vs Choice

• Para 3 = FPTP vs Government Formed

Para 1 = Weaker Argument - Shouldn’t be scrapped and replaced

• Eg. in December 2025, several MPs including Lake Akehurst (Labour) actively pressured Vodafone to address “unjust” treatment of local store franchise owners

• this shows that FPTP has very strong MP-constituency link as the MPs were able to to take and address issues of their constituents

• this delivers effective local representation, showing there is sufficient democratic input in political processes

• therefore, reforms have gone far enough as FPTP enhances rather than diminishing democracy within the UK

Para 1 = Stronger Argument - Should be scrapped and replaced

• Eg. in 2024, the Labour Party won 63% of the seats and therefore commanding a majority with just 33.3% of the vote

• whereas in 2022, NI Assembly used STV where (eg.) Sinn Fein received 29% first preference votes and 30% of the seats

• this shows that FPTP is very unrepresentative as it leads to MPs being voted in when they don’t have majority support, encouraging a democratic deficit

• this means that it should be replaced to ensure fairer representation for all parties

Para 2 = Weaker Argument - Shouldn’t be scrapped and replaced

• In 2024, the first constituency result (Sunderland South) was announced at 23:15 on the day of the election

• the next morning, Starmer arrived at Downing Street as the new Prime Minister at 12:40pm the day after the election

• this shows that despite the limited voter choice, it is extremely easy to use for voters, who only have to select one candidate/party

• this means that results can be processed and a government formed quickly

Para 2 = Stronger Argument - Should be scrapped and replaced

• 2021 Scottish Parliament election eg., the Greens won just 1.29% of the constituency votes, but 8.12% of the top-up votes and got 8 seats.

• this shows that proportional systems offer greater voter choice

• this removes the need for tactical voting and gives smaller partier a better chance of winning seats, encouraging a pluralist democracy

• this is compared to FPTP where voter choice is very limited, prevent them from showing their political preferences fully

• Manchester Rusholme, for example, was won by Labour in 2024 with 51.9.3% of the vote on a turnout of just 40%

Para 3 = Weaker Argument - Shouldn’t be scrapped and replaced

• In 2024, Starmer’s Labour Party won a 174 seat majority with just 33.7% of the popular vote, but there was limited public outrage and questioning of his mandate.

• This shows that FPTP shouldn’t be replaced as it produces strong single-party governments that are able

• this means they have a strong mandate and are able to pass laws effectively eg. Employment Rights Act 2025

• This contrasts with more proportional electoral systems which are more prone to causing minority/coalition governments

• this makes it more likely to lead to compromised policies

Para 3 = Stronger Argument - Should be scrapped and replaced

• On the other hand, recently FPTP has led to some weak governments that haven’t had majorities. In particular the 2010 Lib Dem-Conservative coalition and the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the Conservatives and the DUP following the 2017 election.

• Further, even though FPTP often leads to strong governments, this can be seen as a drawback as these governments don’t have majority support from the population that could grant legitimacy to this strength.