FIRST PAST THE POST

What are its main advantages and disadvantages?

AIMS OF PRESENTATION

This presentation looks at •How the First Past the Post (FPTP) voting system works•Advantages of FPTP•Criticisms of FPTP

DIFFERENT SYSTEMS IN UK

There are FOUR voting systems in use in the UK at the moment.

The First Past The Post (FPTP) is used for UK General Elections.

The Additional Member System (AMS) is used for Scottish parliament elections.

The Single Transferable Vote (STV) is used for Scottish Local authority elections.

The Party List system is used for European parliament elections.

The STV and Party List are both proportional representation systems. The AMS is a hybrid with a FTP element and a PR element.

HOW FPTP WORKS

Voters vote within their parliamentary constituency (or ‘seat’.

Voters have one vote. Voters vote by drawing an ’X’ next to the candidate of their choice.

The candidate who wins the most votes wins the seat.

HOW IT WORKS

650 of these “mini” elections go on, one in each constituency (‘seats’)

The party that wins the most seats gets “first past the post”, half of 650 seats, which wins it the General Election and allows it to become the governing party.

FPTP ADVANTAGE 1 MANDATE TO GOVERN

FPTP usually provides a decisive result and a Government with a clear mandate to deliver its election promises. This happened with Tony Blair’s clear victories in 1997, 2001 and 2005. At each of these elections, one party was returned to power with sufficient numbers of MPs to ensure that the Government had a ruling majority over the other parties.

This governing party had a five year term to fulfil the pledges it made to the voters. If it did not deliver those promises, the Government had no-one else to blame – it had the majority in the House of Commons. Voters can judge the Government on the pledges it made - and kept.

Labour landslide 1997

“The first past the post system does have some advantages. It gets things done without the long debates we see in countries that use proportional representation, such as Germany.”

Julia Margo, Director of Research, Demos think tank

HOWEVER…..

FPTP creates marginal seats which attract all the attention of political parties and safe seats where voters’ views are rarely sought.

Results are often unfair. Labour governed for five years, 2005-2010, after winning less than 36% of the vote.

Also FPTP doesn’t always create majority Government. It didn’t in 2010!

2005 GENERAL ELECTION

FPTP ADVANTAGE 2 PROVIDES STABLE GOVERNMENT

In the UK we are used to stable Government. By this we mean that General Elections or major changes in Government are few and far between. It may be dull, but it’s good for the economy and our quality of life. Business, especially global business, doesn’t like instability.

It likes to know interest rates, currency rates, inflation rates and government policies over the long term. Governments that change frequently are, it is said, bad news for the economy.

So, it is argued that stable government, even those elected by a slightly unfair result, is better than the unstable government a PR system could bring.

Governments with large majorities, supported by the whip system, can dominate the House of Commons.

Stable government is ok but what about bad government.

Doesn’t all power corrupt and absolute power corrupt absolutely?

Would the Iraq war have gone ahead had there been more opposition MPs or even a coalition government?

HOWEVER…..

FPTP also enables by elections to occur during the term of a Parliament. By-elections happen when an MP resigns or dies.

By elections allow voters to express their dis-satisfaction with the Government ofthe day, if they choose. For example, by-elections to register protest e.g.Glasgow East 2008 in which the SNP won a previously “safe” Labour seat.

FPTP ADVANTAGES 3 ALLOWS BY-ELECTIONS

Glasgow East by-election 2008

HOWEVER…..

PR systems such as the Single Transferable Vote (STV) also allow by-elections.

ADVANTAGE 4 RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL MP

Voters have just the one representative who is responsible for their constituency. Voters can get to know that person and make a good judgement on whether they should be re-elected as their MP. George Galloway is one of the UK’s better known MPs!

“We should all know our MP, and if there is something not going right we can see them in their Friday surgeries or write to them until they do something.”

Sue McGregor, broadcaster

HOWEVER…..

How many of us really do get to know what our MP is like? How many of us do get in touch with our MP? And do voters not normally vote for the party, rather than the local candidate?

Have you presented your views to a local councillor or MP? (Hansard Society, 2009)

THE 2011 FPTP REFERENDUM

In May 2011, voters took part in a referendum on whether the current FPTP system for general elections should be changed to the AV.

It was chosen as a result of the coalition between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, the Lib Dems having failed to secure their preferred option – STV.

Yes to AV campaign No to AV campaign

The AV is a combination of FPTP & STV which does make a huge difference to the proportionality of the election. This is perhaps why was once described as a ‘miserable little compromise’ by Nick Clegg, of all people! 13,013,123 (67%) voted No to the AV, with 6,152, 607 voting YES.