Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Electoral Systems - Coggle Diagram
Electoral Systems
Should we replace FPTP with PR
Representation
For -
SNP won 38% of vote and 58/129 seats
.
Labour winning 63% seats on 66% vote. Labour MP Terry Jermy won a seat with just 27% of the vote.
Significantly aids parties with concentrated geographical support
Against - AMS, people can vote for the party not the person -> MPs are held more accountable to the whip than to their constituents. In FPTP, MP-constituent link.
22 Labour MPs rebelled against the whip to speed up compensation process for contaminated blood scandal
Against - Safeguard against extremist parties as
BNP in 2010 got 2% of the vote but 0 seats.
Simplicity and Voter Choice
For - PR gives more choice as
74% wasted votes in GE 2024 and 20% voted tactically.
Contributing to a low
turnout of 60%?
Against -
2011 AV referendum saw a 68% no vote
to change -> other voting systems too complex as
Welsh Senedd elections and Scottish Parliament elections got a turnout of 52% and 53%
. Quick results with FPTP as the
first constituent results came out at 23:15
and it was clear Labour had won by early morning
Type of Government Produced
For - Westminster is turning into a multiparty system as only
67% of votes went to major 2 parties.
Reform got 14% of the vote and only 5 seats
. Coalitions and hung Parliaments are becoming more frequent (
2010 and 2017-8 majority
)
Against - FPTP usually provides strong, stable majorities making it easier to implement change.
Breakdown of Bute House Agreement in 2024
after Greens strongly criticised SNP for abandoning key climate change and LGBT policies ->
Greens only had 8 seats which
shows disproportionate influence.
Blair's landslide victory of 179 in 1997
allowed him to implement New Labour changes and constitutional reform
Plaid Cymru and SNP did not win a majority in their Parliament elections so will need to form a coalition
Do referendums create more issues than they solve?
Participation
Against - Combat low turnout in GEs
(60%),
and promotes a different approach to participation.
2014 IndyRef saw a turnout of 84%
For - Not all referendums have high turnouts ->
2011 AV referendum had a turnout of 42%
. Quality of this participation is lower as more susceptible to misinformation. 2016 Brexit referendum had misinformation on both sides like
BJ saying that we wasted £350 million a year on the EU which
could be spent on NHS
Party Unity
Against - Can resolve divisons within a party ->
Harold Wilson and Cameron used referendums to solve divisions over Europe.
. It does fit into the UK political system as it is important to consult the public before major decisions are made. 1997 Devolution referendum with 74% voting in favour
For - Undermines the Burkean 'trustee' model of represenative democracy. Party leaders use referendums cynically to push forward their own agenda.
Cameron called the Brexit referendum to quash UKIP threat.
LibDems were given a 2011 AV referendum to stifle their call for other changes.
. Also challenges Parliamentary Sovereignty as decisions are made by public -
Brexit was not supported by any majory political party
Conflict Resolution
Against - Can decide constitutional agreements like
1998 Good Friday Agreement (71% voted yes)
put an end to the Troubles. Direct democracy means people are more likely to accept the changes -> important to justify constitutional change as the UK has an
uncodified and unentrenched constitution
For - can lead to '
neverendums
' as the
2014 IndyRef led to increasing calls for independence and there were calls for a second Brext referendum
.
Brexit ref led to 2 years of gridlock and the resignation of 2 Prime Ministers
as the leave vote lacked a clear plan of implementation - 'yes/no' is too binary. Can also lead to issues if a strong majority is not gained like the mere
52% majority for Brexit