Electoral systems Flashcards
SV
Supplementary vote
- Used for directly elected mayors in England including the Mayor of London and the Police and crime commission elections.
- Non-proportional electoral system.
Features of SV
- Non-Proportional
- Single-member consituencies
- Electors have two votes, a first preference and a second ‘supplementary’ vote.
- Winning candidates in the election must gain a minimum of 50% of all votes cast.
- Votes are counted according to first preference, and if no candidate reaches 50% in the first round, the top two candidates remain in the election and all other candidates drop out, their vote being redistributed on the basis of their second vote.
- The candidate with the most first choice and second choice votes is elected.
Advantages of SV
- SV is simple to understand and would be easy for voters to use, its familiar and consituentcy boundaries would stay the same, all that would change is the ballot cards.
- They need to gain second-preference votes to win a second round, this encourages better campaigning, to all the electorate and not just focusing on certain groups.
- Penalises extremist parties who are unlikely to gain many first prefference votes.
- Single party majority government.
- More proportional than FPTP
- Greater legitemacy as they have to have relatively broad support.
- Increased votes for smaller parties.
- Less wasted votes
Disadvantages of SV
- The winning candidate may not need a majority of first preference votes, the one that secures the most first preference votes may not be elected after the second prefferences are redistributed, the least unpopular rather the most popular might be elected.
- Not a proportional outcome if used for a general elections
- Fewer votes are wasted with SV compared with FPTP, although it does not neccesarily ensure the winning candidate has support of at least 50% of voters because a proportion of SV will be for candidates that have dropped out.
- Small party votes will still be low, because if the second prefference votes are used for the green party and lib dems, this will not help their chances.
- If there are two or more strong candiates than voters will have to guess who will make the final round for their second preference vote, if they failt to do so their vote will be wasted.
- Some voters will have their voted excluded in round one and wasted in round 2.
EXAMPLE of Disadvantages of SV - Winning candidates may not win 50% of the vote.
The ERS confirmed that ‘in almost two decades of SV elections for the Mayor of London only in 2016 has a mayor won more than 50% of the total ballots’
This is because ‘non transferable votes’ for anyone that isnt the remaining two parties are excluded, in 2012 over 7% of votes were excluded from the second round meaning Johnson won with 47.2% of the vote.
EXAMPLE of Disadvantages of SV - Party representation
With the exception of the 2000 election when the indpendant Ken Livingstone was elected, every other final two candidates have been from the labour and conservative party.
In 2016 there were 36 Police and Crime and commissioner contests in England, 33 were won by conservative and labour.
EXAMPLES of the advantages of SV - Greater legitemacy as they have to have relatively broad support. (OVER 50%)
Sadiq Kahn was elected with over 50% over two rounds, winning 44% of the first round votes and after the second round of votes he had won 56.7% of the vote
In 2017 Andy Burnham was elected as Mayor of Manchester with 63% of the vote.
EXAMPLE of Disadvantages of SV - Turnout was low
Average turnout for Police and Crim commissionier elections is 27%
Turnout at the 2012 election was 38%
EXAMPLE of Disadvantages of SV - Wasted Votes
At the PCC elections the number of ballots rejected 3.4% was higher than at any other nation wide electoral event.
24% were rejected at the second prefference votes, in 80% of cases this is because voters failed to put any such preference.
Proportional systems in the UK
AMS and STV
AMS
Additional member system
This is used for elections to the Scottish parliament, the welsh parliament and the greater london assembly. The second most used system in the Uk after FPTP.
AMS and the list system
A proportion of seats are elected using a single member consituency system and FPTP, for example 57% in the Scottish Parliament.
The standard list system has no consituency, each party puts up as many candidayes as there are seats in the list, the voters then vote for a party not a candidate, and seats are allocated according to the percentage of votes recieved.
Candiates are selected from the top of each party list and then are allocated seats, this is a closed list where the electors have no say in the order of politicians on the list.
There are also regional lists where the country is divided up into smaller regions allowing for some regional representation.
- Electors cast two votes, one for the candidate in a single member consituency and another for a party.
Advantages of the AMS system
- The mixed character of this system balances the need for consituency representation against the need for electoral fairness.
- Although the system is broadly proportional in terms of its outcomes, it keeps alive the possibility of a single party government.
- It allows voters to make wider and more considered choices, it also allows voters to express personal support for a candidate, while voting for a different party with their second vote.
- Each voter has directly accountable single-consituency representative.
- Every voter has at least one effective role, that is not wasted.
- Lists means excellent proportionality.
Disadvantages of the AMS system
- The retention of a single-member consituencies reduces the likelihood of maximum proportionality.
- Consituency representation is less effective than FPTP, because of the larger size of consituencies and because proportion of representatives have no consituency duties.
- Confusion is created by having two classes of representative, many representatives are accountable to party leadership rather than voters.
- AMS sometimes gives rise to ‘overhang’ seats, where a party wins more seats via their consituency vote than it is entitled to according to its proportional vote.
EXAMPLE Advantages of the AMS system - Proportional
- In the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections the SNP won 45% fo the votes and 49% of the total seats and the conservatives won 23% of the total votes and gained 24% of the seats.
- Before this using the consituency votes the SNP won 47% of the vote and gained 81% of the seats, the conservatives won 22% of the votes and 10% of the seats.
EXAMPLE Disadvantages of the AMS system - Not always proportional
In the 2016 Welsh Parliament elections results 2016, 34% of the votes were won by labour, and they ended up winning 48% of the seats. Furthermore the Lib Dems won 9% of the total votes but only managed 2% of the seats.
EXAMPLE Advantages of the AMS system - Keeps alive the single party majority government possibility
In the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections the SNP won a majority, winning 69 seats and 53.5% of the total votes.
EXAMPLE Disadvantage of the AMS System - Usually results in a weak government with no majority
SInce 2011 a majority has not be won at the Scottish parliament elections, there has never been a majority government in the Welsh Parliament elections using the AMS systems.
EXAMPLE Advantages of the AMS system - Smaller Party Representation
In the 2016 Scottish Parliament election The Green party and Liberal Democrats won 11 seats between them and 9 percent of all seats.
STV
Single Transferable vote
Used in Northern Ireland Assemby and in Northern Ireland and Scotland for the local government.
- There are multimember consituencies
- Political parties are able to put as many candidates as there are seats to fill in each consituency.
- Electors vote preferentially
- Candidates are alected if they achieve a quota of votes, this is calculated on the basis of the droop formula.
Total number of votes cast/number of seats to be filled plus 1
PLUS 1
- Votes are counted according to first preferences, if any candidate achieves the qouta their additional votes are counted according to second preferences.
- If this process still leaves some seats fulfilled, the candidate with the fewest votes drops out and their votes are redistributed according to second preferences.
Advantages of STV
- The system is capable of achieving highly proportional outcomes.
- The availability of several members means that consituents can choose who to take their grievances, much better representation.
- STV gives voters much greater choice, you rank every candidate.
- Fewer votes are wasted under STV.
- Under STV there are no safe seats, meaning candidates cannot be compalcement and have to campaign everywhere.
- No tactical voting
EXAMPLE Advantages of STV - Proportional outcomes
2017 Northern Ireland Assemby election, the DUP won 31% of the seats and 28.1% of the first preference votes, Sinn Fein won 30% of the seats and 27.9% of the votes. Finally the Alliance won 9% of the seats and 9% of the votes.
EXAMPLE Advantages of STV - Good representation
The Northern Ireland assemby is divided into 18 multi member constituencies, each one of these elects 5 Assemby members. Meaning there are just over 40,000 people per consituent.
Disadvantages of STV
- Strong and stable single-party government is unlikely under STV.
- In sparsely poppulated areas such as Scotland, STV would lead to very large constiuencies, NI population is 5 million, the UKs is 67 million, this would result in relatively poor representation. Who takes accountability, not clear?
- STV has been known to experience ‘Donkey Voting’ where candidates vote in the order they see on the ballot.
