Zusammenfassung der Ressource
(4) Which electoral system is best?
- FPTP
- Systematic bias of FPTP
- Larger parties benefit at the
expense of smaller parties.
- Winner takes all effect means that 100% of representaion is
gained within a constituency by a single candidates and party
- Winning candidates tend to come from
larger parties due to plurality support
- Voters discouraged to vote for smaller parties
as they will not gain seats = wasted votes
- (4)
- FPTP is a single member
pluality system (SMP)
- It is criticized due to its disproportionality - the
system focuses on the election of individual
members, not the representation of parties
- 1951 Conservatives formed a majority
parliament but won fewer votes than Labour
- Today liberals forming a coalition with
Conservatives but Labour won more votes
- (1)
- Two-party system is a consequence
of the FPTP system and leads to
dominance of the major parties
- Whilst the proportion of the votes has started to fall from 95% in 50's to
65% in 2010, 85% of MPs were either the Labour or Conservative in 2010
- As such political elections have become a "two-horse race".
Marginal seats are where battles are fought over potential
constituencies with no significant political leaning
- (2)
- Systematic bias of FPTP
- parties with geographically distributed
support are more likely to gain more seats
- This is becasue geographical concentration makes a party
more effective to gain plural support, and where they are not
winning support, they are not wasting as many votes
- Conversely if they are too distributed
they may come second or third
- Liberals suffer due Labour and
Conservatives over-representation and
concentration due to class bais of voters
- (4)
- Single party governments are a
consequence of the two-party system
and are more likely using FPTP
- This means that a single party forms
the government, with the second
"major" party forming the opposition
- In Feb 1974 and May 2010 the system failed to produce a single
party government, encouraging arguments for electoral reform
- (3)
- FPTP tends to produce a
"winner's bonus"
- This means that relatively small
shifts in voters gained can lead to
dramatic numbers of seats awarded
- Leading to landslide victories
- 1983 Conservatives won a 143
majority, up 44 seats in 1979
- In 1997 and 2001 Labour
experienced the same
- (1)
- Tactical voting and
targeting seats
- Lib Dems saw increase in performance in 2010 due to tactical voting and
targeting of seats in election campaigns. This enabled them to "artificially"
concentrate their support to ensure the votes were more effective
- (4)
- Proportaional representation
- (1) Greater proportionality
- Proportional voting systems are seen to offer
greater proportionalit because they reduce the
landslide or winners bonus effects of FPTP
- 2007 Scottish Parliament elections, Labour won just
over half the constituency seats (37/63) on the bais of
32% of the vote, its overall representation in parliament
was corrected by distributing party-list seats
- So Labour had 36% of seats, in
second place behind the SNP
- (2) PR leads to government's
to compromies
- It can be that case that consensus building is required for
single-party minority governments, which need informal
support of the other parties to maintain control of parliament
- Thus, policy cannot be
driven through by one party
- Scotland and westminster have broken
apart on a number of isses - tuition fees,
provion of non-medical care for the elderly
- (3) PR means coalition
government are more likely
- The Scottish Parliament, before the SNP majority
executive formed in 2011 they saw Labour-Lib Dem
coalitions, or in 2007 a minority SNP executive
- The Westminster coalition raises
question about the implications of PR
- Welsh Assembly formed a bried Labour minority executive after the 1999
election, with a Labour-Lib Dem exective being formed in 2000, and a
grand coalition being formed in 2007 between Labour and Plaid Cymru
- (4) PR allow minor
parties representaion
- Multiparty systems allow for minor
parties to gain represnetation, broading
the basis of party representation
- In 2010 the Green Party had one
representative in Westminster,
despite having gained 250,000
votes in some previous election.
But are represented in Scotland (2),
Greater London Authority (2) and 2
in European Parliament
- UKIP won 600,000 votes in 2005
but gained no seats - but has 13
seats in European Parliament
- Differents
- Elections
- Fill office / form government
- Vote for candiate / party
- General issues
- Representative democracy
- Referendums
- Helps to make policy decisions
- Select yes/no option
- Ad hoc (decided by governmen)
- Direct democracy