The Constitution Society: Working to promote informed debate about constitutional reform

SHOULD WE USE A DIFFERENT ELECTORAL SYSTEM AT UK GENERAL ELECTIONS?

The primary objectives of an electoral system include:

• Stable government
• Proportionality
• Voter choice
• MP-constituency link
• Voter participation
• Legitimacy

In recent years, first past the post (FPTP) has come under increased scrutiny. [More+] Reasons for the increased scrutiny of the electoral system include:

• The rise of third parties — in particular, the rise of the Liberal Democrats, who have long campaigned in favour of some form of proportional representation because FPTP prejudices results against them.
• The growing concern that FPTP encourages the formation of strong governments able to dominate Parliament with ‘false majorities’. For example, the Labour administration elected in 2005 only got 2.8% more of the total vote than the Conservatives, but held a clear majority of 66 in the Commons.

Arguments for and against FPTP include:

FOR FPTP:

• Likely to produce clear results: it is rare that FPTP leads to a ‘hung parliament’ where there is no obvious majority
• Establishes a clear relationship between constituencies and their MP
• Easily understood by voters

AGAINST FPTP:

• Distorts the popular vote and produces ‘false’ majorities
• Produces ‘wasted’ votes, and thus may discourage voter participation (votes are said to be ‘wasted’ in safe seats, where the majority of the incumbent political party is so large that there is no real prospect of an opposing candidate winning the seat)
• Works to the disadvantage of third parties, unless those parties are concentrated geographically
• Intensifies adversarial politics

The most commonly discussed alternative to FPTP is Proportional Representation (PR). Arguments for and against PR include:

FOR PR:

• Provides a closer reflection of the popular vote in the number of seats allocated in the legislature
• Reduces the number of ‘wasted’ votes
• Encourages consensus-based politics because, usually, no one party has a majority
• Encourages voter participation, because ‘every vote counts’ towards proportionality

AGAINST PR:

• Almost always produces a hung parliament (where no single party gains a majority of seats). This arguably encourages unstable and weak government
• Can be confusing to the voter, both in terms of the system itself and the complex ballot papers required
• Can give a voice and a share of legislative power to extremist parties
• Blurs the relationship between constituency and MP

IS IT ‘UNFAIR’ THAT SOME CONSTITUENCIES ARE LARGER THAN OTHERS?

A variation in the size of constituencies can add to the perception that a government is elected with a ‘false’ majority.

The Boundary Commissions review all constituencies on a regular basis to try as far as possible to keep the size of constituencies roughly equivalent, but there remain considerable differences. The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 requires the Commissions to put greater emphasis on equalising the size of constituencies (over and above other factors such as historical and geographical constituency identity). It legislates that each constituency be within 5% of the national average.

SHOULD MORE ISSUES BE DECIDED BY A REFERENDUM?

There are a number of arguments for and against the use of referendums:

FOR REFERENDUMS:

• Referendums provide a form of direct democracy, and thus may encourage greater political participation.
• They provide a means of legitimising a particular course of action.
• They can be used to provide a sense of finality.

AGAINST REFERENDUMS:

• In bypassing Parliament, referendums undermine representative democracy. For instance, they allow politicians to avoid the responsibility of making controversial decisions by shifting the burden onto the electorate.
• Referendums are too crude, reducing complex issues to a yes/no answer.
• They can be manipulated by governments, particularly through the wording of the question, to achieve a particular end.[More+]
• The rules on when a referendum should be held are unclear: whether or not a referendum is held seems to be at a government’s discretion.