FPTP

• FPTP

  • UK divided into 650 constituencies.
  • Average adult population of constituencies is 75,000.
  • Only a plurality needed to win the seat, not a majority.
  • In 2017, the SNP won Lanark and East Hamilton with only 32.6% of the vote.
  • In 2015 General Election, only 319 MPs won an absolute majority.
  • In 2015, 50 MPs secured their seat with less than 40% of the vote.
• Importance of concentrated support

  • FPTP favours parties with support concentrated in certain areas.
  • In 2017; Labour won 40% of the vote and 40.3% of seats especially in Northern England and Wales.
  • Parties with dispersed support such as Greens and UKIP, win few individual seats; in 2017, Greens won 1.6% of the vote but this translated into just 1 seat.
  • FPTP benefits the SNP in Scotland because their opponents Labour and the Conservatives have dispersed support.
• Votes per successful candidate

  • Impact of FPTP can be judged by how many votes it took for each party to secure the election of a candidate.
  • This is calculated by dividing total number of votes won by each party nationally by the number of seats won.
  • In 2017; Greens need over 525,000 votes to elect one MP whereas DUP needed just 29,000.
  • Northern Ireland parties benefit due to being evenly matched and having low voter turnout.
• Summary of FPTP

  • Gives advantage to parties with concentrated support in certain regions.
  • Favours larger parties.
  • There is a 'winner's bonus'; in 2017, Conservatives won 42.4% of the vote but converted this into 48.9% of seats.
  • Tends to produce an outright winner - however in 2010, 2015, and 2017 it produced weak majority or minority governments.
  • Associated with majority governments.
  • Disadvantageous to parties with dispersed support.
• Safe Seats

  • Electoral Reform Society estimates that in 2015, 368 seats out of 650 were safe seats.
  • Estimated that 25.7 million voters live in safe seats.
  • Negatives: Parties pay little attention to safe seats, so voters less informed; MPs for safe seats are less accountable because less likely they will be defeated; voters in safe seats may feel their votes are 'wasted'; votes in safe seats are not of equal value to marginal seats.
  • Electoral Reform Society suggested that in 2015 over 22 million votes were wasted.
• Marginal seats

  • In 2015, estimated that there were 194 marginal seats.
  • Voters in marginal seats feel that their votes matter.
  • Parties concentrate efforts on marginal seats.
  • Character and policies of MPs in marginal seats becomes important.
  • May result in 'tactical voting'.
• Arguments against FPTP

  • Not a proportional system.
  • Produces 'electoral deserts' where votes are essentially wasted.
  • Encourages tactical voting which can cause voters to abandon their true political beliefs.
  • Prevents new parties breaking into the system; reduces plurality of views.
  • Since 1945, the winning party in government has never won more than half the popular vote - in 2015, the Conservatives were elected with just 36.9% of the popular vote.
• Arguments in favour of FPTP

  • Clear constituency-MP bond; increases accountability of MPs.
  • Produces a clear electoral winner; promotes strong and stable government.
  • 2011 Alternative Vote referendum saw a resounding no to electoral change.
  • Prevents extremist parties gaining political power.
  • Allows for MPs to be elected based on complex individual policies and character rather than the views of the national party.