Against FPTP

Question 1

Two reasons against FPTP

Answer 1

Disproportionate outcomes

Low turnout

Question 2

What are Disproportionate outcomes?

Answer 2

Winners with a slim majority of vote shares.

Question 3

Examples of Disproportionate outcomes

Answer 3

Constituency - Ynys Mon - 35% conservative win, 70% voted, therefore only 25% electorate voted for them.

National Scale - UKIP 3.8 million votes, only 1 seat won in HOC.

Question 4

Why are Disproportionate outcomes bad for govt?

Answer 4

Doesn’t give them a strong mandate to carry out their manifesto - Also can produce govt. with a smaller amount of overall votes, such as in 1951 / 1974.

Question 5

Compare proportionality of FPTP with List PR.

Answer 5

List PR allocates seats based on overall vote share for each party, meaning that it is very proportional. This was seen in 2019 European Parliament GE:

• 39% voted for Brexit party
• They won 40% of seats.

Question 6

Why does FPTP give Low turnout?

Answer 6

FPTP discourages participation because it discourages supporters of smaller parties from voting.

This is also partly due to safe seats, which is encourages by FPTP “Winner takes all” approach - It is of course a majoritarian system.

Question 7

Examples of low turnout in General elections:

Answer 7

61% in 2005

Question 8

Low turnout in modern times?

Answer 8

Steadily increasing however -

• 61% in 2005
• 65% in 2010
• 66% in 2015

Question 9

How does turnout compare with List PR?

Answer 9

In theory, fully proportional voting system such as List PR should boost turnout, however, in 2019 EU parliament election, only 39% voted, which may only be due to the fact no one cares about EU parliament, and may have high voter turnout when put into practice.