Electoral Systems:
FPTP- plurality system used in general elections
SV- majoritarian system used in London mayor elections
STV- proportional system used in Northern Ireland Parliament and Scottish local government
AMS- hybrid system of fptp and closed party list- Scottish Parliament
Should FPTP be retained (continue)?
YES NO
Easy to understand and produces clear results in each The overall outcome is not proportional or fair- some
constituency. There is no uncertainty. parties win more seats while others win fewer than they
deserve (green party had around 850,000 votes in 2019
but only had one seat due to disperse voting)
Quick and easy to gain results- efficient. Whereas other Many votes may be wasted because of living in a
political systems take too long to count (AMS) constituency with a safe seat- many seats become part
of the party “heartland”- no party competition. This
makes their vote less valuable
Produces one representative for each constituency- Those living in safe seat constituencies must tactically
close constituency-MP bond and can call them to vote- leave party they support
account. This was the case for Fiona Onasanya and
her constituency in Peterborough. Mps recall act
Produces a clear winner in a general election- single Recently, in the 2010 and 2017 elections, the system
party with a parliamentary majority. This was the case failed to give a clear winner and they had to form
for all elections before 2010 and shows how capable it coalitions or supply and demands deal. This shows how
is of producing stable governments. it cannot catch up with modern times and needs to be
changed.
It helps to prevent small parties breaking into the Political inertia.
system- extremist parties
The system has been used for a long time- entering the
unknown is risky.
Would Additional Member System be a good system to use for Westminster elections?
YES NO
It produces a broadly proportional outcome and is fair It is more complex and so can confuse voters- the
to all parties- in the 2016 scottish parliament elections, FPTP system works well and has been for a long time.
SNP won 59/73 constituency seats. If it had used the It ensures that the results are clear and concise.
FPTP, they would’ve won 104/129 seats
It gives voters two votes so more choice- people won’t It produces two classes of representatives- those with a
have to choose one party and can have more freedom constituency and those elected via the lists- the latter
with who they agree with. are more powerful which will cause decision making to
be a lot harder.
It combines preserving constituency representation with Can result in the election of extremist candidates which
a proportional outcome- this means the constituency- can be very dangerous
mp bond remains and they can be called to account.
It helps smaller parties that can’t win constituency
contests- this means that the green party who only got
one seat in the 2019 election despite having 850,000+
FPTP- plurality system used in general elections
SV- majoritarian system used in London mayor elections
STV- proportional system used in Northern Ireland Parliament and Scottish local government
AMS- hybrid system of fptp and closed party list- Scottish Parliament
Should FPTP be retained (continue)?
YES NO
Easy to understand and produces clear results in each The overall outcome is not proportional or fair- some
constituency. There is no uncertainty. parties win more seats while others win fewer than they
deserve (green party had around 850,000 votes in 2019
but only had one seat due to disperse voting)
Quick and easy to gain results- efficient. Whereas other Many votes may be wasted because of living in a
political systems take too long to count (AMS) constituency with a safe seat- many seats become part
of the party “heartland”- no party competition. This
makes their vote less valuable
Produces one representative for each constituency- Those living in safe seat constituencies must tactically
close constituency-MP bond and can call them to vote- leave party they support
account. This was the case for Fiona Onasanya and
her constituency in Peterborough. Mps recall act
Produces a clear winner in a general election- single Recently, in the 2010 and 2017 elections, the system
party with a parliamentary majority. This was the case failed to give a clear winner and they had to form
for all elections before 2010 and shows how capable it coalitions or supply and demands deal. This shows how
is of producing stable governments. it cannot catch up with modern times and needs to be
changed.
It helps to prevent small parties breaking into the Political inertia.
system- extremist parties
The system has been used for a long time- entering the
unknown is risky.
Would Additional Member System be a good system to use for Westminster elections?
YES NO
It produces a broadly proportional outcome and is fair It is more complex and so can confuse voters- the
to all parties- in the 2016 scottish parliament elections, FPTP system works well and has been for a long time.
SNP won 59/73 constituency seats. If it had used the It ensures that the results are clear and concise.
FPTP, they would’ve won 104/129 seats
It gives voters two votes so more choice- people won’t It produces two classes of representatives- those with a
have to choose one party and can have more freedom constituency and those elected via the lists- the latter
with who they agree with. are more powerful which will cause decision making to
be a lot harder.
It combines preserving constituency representation with Can result in the election of extremist candidates which
a proportional outcome- this means the constituency- can be very dangerous
mp bond remains and they can be called to account.
It helps smaller parties that can’t win constituency
contests- this means that the green party who only got
one seat in the 2019 election despite having 850,000+
