Introduction
Introduction
The coalition goverment which resulted from the 2010 UK General Election has promised a referendum on the Alternative Vote system. However, it is not clear whether that will address the major discrepancy between the number of MPs that were elected per party and the percentage of electors that voted for each party. Both the Conservative and Labour parties won a higher percentage of seats than their percentage of votes:
- The Conservatives won 47% of the seats with 36% of the vote.
- Labour won 40% of the seats with 29% of the vote. But...
- The Liberal Democrats won 9% of the seats with 23% of the votes.
- Other parties won 4% of the seats with 6% of the votes.
- Unrepresented parties won 0% of the seats with 6% of the votes.
So this paper presents a way of improving the proportionality whilst retaining the "first past the post" (FPTP) electoral system.
This presentation can be downloaded in pdf format by clicking here.
The Merits of the "First Past the Post" System
A significant merit of the FPTP system is that the electorate in each constituency vote for the candidate they want to represent them, without the complexity of alternative votes. This direct link between the MP and the voters who elected him/her encourages good constituency MPs who actively represent their constituents' interests in parliament. It is good for "grass roots" democracy.
It is also claimed that the FPTP system promotes stable government, as either of the two main parties can gain an overall majority in parliament with only a minority of the vote. However this is also a de-merit in that they may lack a clear mandate from the electorate to implement their policies
The De-merits of the "First Past the Post" System
A major de-merit of the FPTP system is that it disenfranchises all the voters who voted for candidates who did not win a seat. This contributes to a large discrepancy nationally between the average votes per MP for candidates of the two main parties compared to the others, as is illustrated in the table:
This can be a disincentive for electors to participate, if they expect that their vote will not count. It can also promote tactical voting, where electors vote to keep an opponent from winning the seat, rather than voting for their preferred candidate.
It is clear that, for whatever reason, the present system favours the two main parties.
Note: These figures are based on 649 constituencies having returned an MP, as the voting was delayed in one constituency.
The Merits of Proportional Representation
The primary merit of proportional representation is that it values votes more fairly. This is good for democracy as it encourages people to vote. It also encourages them to vote for their preferred candidate, rather than tactically.
The De-merits of Proportional Representation
The de-merits of proportional representation include complexity, and lack of clarity. E.g. In an alternative voting system, it is not apparent to the voter at the time which of the candidates they choose will benefit from their vote. Whilst the centralised list of candidates used by other proportional systems may result in weaker links between the constituencies and the members of parliament.
