And Disadvantages Of The First-Past-The-Post System

The election system that we currently have in the UK is a lot like marmite, you either love it or you hate it… There are many different arguments for and against this system, however people forget that within getting rid of the First Past the Post system, you will then need to then replace it. This then poses the vital question of which is the best fitting system and should we really change tradition?

The Additional Member System gives voters more choice and better representation than does First Past the Post. Discuss.

Proportional representation is almost always acknowledged as the fairest electoral system. With this in mind, many still reject a mixed member proportional system. Critics argue that the current method has produced a stable and effective government, while MMP would create an ineffective government. Wiseman feels that since Canada has been consistently stable, our electoral system does not need to be changed. Hiemstra and Jansen disagree with the plurality system that is currently in place for it does not produce fair

The second reason why FPTP should not be used for elections to the House of Commons is that it is not representative, meaning that the percentage share of votes is not proportional to the percentage share of seats, because of single member constituencies. This is a weakness as it means that there is not a fair level of representation within the House of Commons, which makes the system less democratic as not everybody’s views are entirely represented in Parliament. For example, in the 2010 general elections, the Conservative party won 36% of votes, but a staggering 47.1% of seats, whilst UKIP gained 3.1% of votes, but 0% of seats, indicating the tendency of FPTP to radically distort the relationship between votes and seats. Due to the fact that FPTP is a plurality system, rather than a majoritarian one, MPs can win the seat by as little as 1 vote, meaning that

Also F-P-T-P ensures that one party obtains a majority of seats, for example, there have only been three full coalition governments in the UK- two in world wars and one in 2010. Therefore, F-P-T-P voting system produces different outcomes to other voting systems as it’s a majority system.

Since party politics began in Canada, the style in which leaders are elected is comparable to a horse race. Using the single member plurality (SMP), more commonly referred to as “first past the post,” method of seat allocation in both the House of Commons and each province's Legislative Assembly, whoever gets the most votes is asked to form the government; this only takes into accounts the number of seats a party wins, not the overall popular vote. In a political system not limited to two parties, like the United States, many times over 50% of Canadians do not want the party that won, to win. In this current electoral system, votes are wasted, smaller parties are terribly misrepresented and, in some cases, a party with a lower percent of

Proponents say the voting method ensures that whoever is elected has the support of a majority of voters. They say this helps increase civility because candidates need to appeal to a spectrum broader than just their base in order to win over their opponents’ supporters on subsequent ballots. And theoretically it eliminates the possibility of a “spoiler” candidate winning.

In addition, the Electoral College’s outcome does not demonstrate how a Democratic System should work. Third parties often get discouraged to run for presidency since they are unable to gain any strength do to the way the Electoral College is structured. Voters are often dissuaded to vote on states with a clear favorite, for they feel like their vote would not have an effect. The Electoral College gives power to smaller less populated states, which in turn boosts the electoral strength, thus traditionally favoring the Republican party. An advantage the Electoral College provides is the support of checks and balances as well as deliberation. This relates to the opinion of undermining the other government branches, thus preventing a tyranny. Often many people believe the Electoral College keeps the two-party system in place, and the third parties out of the election. Therefore, it provides our country with stability. The system also allows states to have freedom in designing their own laws regarding voting, thus offering them the ability to effect

The First Past The Post system’s ability to create single party governments therefore means that that government will be stable and cohesive. Within parties the majority of people have shared political ideologies and ideas and so the party elected to government will be able to make decisions quickly and efficiently as everyone will be aiming towards shared goals or desires for policies. The governing party will be loyal to their traditional or modern ideologies and will have decided upon one set of policies in their manifesto before the election and so they will not need a large amount of discussion and debate before policies are passed. All members of the party will be subject to the same party disciplines so they will all be following the same rules and working together which again ensures that the government is stable. A stable government means that parties can pass their desired policies quickly which will be beneficial to the public as they will feel that the party is doing their role correctly and efficiently. If a governing party were to not be stable then it may affect their future election prospects as the public are unlikely to vote in a party that they have previously seen as unstable.

The purpose of an election is to represent the best interests of a society. Everyone must be represented in a method that elects the candidate that was supported across the country. The electoral college is the perfect setup for a country

Canadian electoral system is largely based on the single member plurality (SMP) system which was inherited from its former British colonial masters. The system dates back to several years before the formation of the Canadian confederation. Some of the common features of the Canadian electoral system include election candidates to represent designated geographical areas popularly known as” ridings”, counting and tallying of the votes casted on the basis of the districts as opposed to the parties of the candidates (Dyck, 622). Finally, a candidate only needs a simple majority over the other candidates in order to be considered a winner, even if the winner has a small percentage of votes. This system has however been heavily criticized for its winner takes all way of judging victory. Critics argue that if the winner takes over the whole system, it may result into unfair representation of the various social groups, but it may also bring into power unstable minority participation in government. For example, a candidate can win even with barely 25% of all the votes casted, while the small parties may end up with no seats in the parliament.

The (FPTP) system is also known as the 'winner-take-all' system, in which the candidate with the most votes gets elected. FPTP voting methods can be used for single and multiple member elections. In a single member election the candidate with the highest number, not necessarily a majority, of votes is elected.

In the UK, we have been using the First Past The Post system as our electoral system since we became a democracy. Whilst this system works for us, there are many systems that we could use, these being: Closed Party List, AMS, STV and Supplementary Vote. All these have various strengths and weaknesses to them.

Britain is considering changing current first past the post voting system (FPTP) to proportional representation (PR). The main reason is that FPTP is “quasi-democratic” voting system under which there is only one majority party ruling the government and it does not represent wishes of all voters as some votes are wasted. Whereas, PR seems to be the best alternative voting system with proportionality of seats in mandatory places, more parties ruling government and etc. Let us look at these two voting systems and analyze whether PR is suitable and alternative change for FPTP and do advantages of PR outweigh disadvantages.

Elections and electoral systems aim at converting the popular will expressed as votes into choices between candidates of political parties for political offices in the executive and legislature. The electoral system therefore reflects itself in the party system and the structure of governmental representation. This association between elections, parties and government takes different forms. Ideal electoral systems should comprise of competition, effective government, and fair representation along with free and fair voting.