Recent general election results have shown the need for electoral reform Essay Example

the formation of majority governments which provide political stability, as seen in the Conservative party's domination of the 20th century. However, critics question the true stability of FPP governments when policy changes occur frequently, evident in the steel industry's fluctuating nationalisation status. Despite these arguments, there is no significant public support for a referendum on electoral reform.

Insufficient demand or insufficient knowledge of alternatives may be the reasons behind this occurrence. The Alternative Vote (AV) and Supplementary Vote (SV) systems are just as simple to comprehend as the straightforward First-Past-The-Post (FPP) system. In the FPP system, political parties devise a manifesto that seeks to attract people from diverse backgrounds and lifestyles by outlining their proposed actions while in power.

The act of winning an election is often associated with gaining a mandate to execute the party's manifesto. Nonetheless, this concept of a mandate is deemed a 'constitutional fiction' as no political party has secured more than 50% of the vote since 1935. Therefore, it would be inaccurate for any party to assert that they have a mandate from all citizens to govern. For instance, Labour Party only received one in four people's votes and still won in 1997. Advocates of the First-Past-The-Post (FPP) system contend that MPs are closely connected with their constituents due to the limited size of constituencies. Conversely, other electoral systems such as Additional Member System and Single Transferable Vote supposedly disrupt this connection. Despite this argument, most individuals are not familiar with their MP's name.

The FPP system results in unequal distribution of voting power, with 70% of votes being wasted. Safe seat constituencies have the highest number of wasted votes. In May

1979, electing a Liberal Democrat candidate required an average of 391,393 votes while the Conservatives needed only 40,406 votes for the same outcome. Despite receiving only 3 out of 10 votes, Thatcher secured a majority of 143. Tactical voting is prevalent and was highlighted by Labour winning 35 seats due to tactical voting in 1997. Some supporters may not vote for the Liberal Democrats as they believe it would be futile and not impact electoral outcomes.

Therefore, in order to prevent a particular party from gaining power, many voters choose to support a different political party. The success of elections often lies in the outcome of closely contested constituencies, with only 1200 people in 11 constituencies determining the result of the 1992 election. To win elections, political parties must appeal to "switches" - voters who are likely to change their minds - in marginal constituencies. These switches are often characterized as being xenophobic, pro-Thatcher, and emphasizing the importance of "law and order" and individual acquisition.

Party leaders, like Blair, will focus on securing support from minority groups who hold the power to alter their allegiance. These groups wield substantial influence as they impact a considerable portion of the political agenda, although their views may not necessarily reflect those of the broader population. The outcome of the election in 1997 was determined by a mere 0.2% shift in voters. Proportional Representation is an alternative to First Past the Post and is currently extensively employed.

The different types of PR include closed and open list systems, as well as the Single Transferable Vote (STV). Closed List Systems are commonly used in European countries such as Norway, Spain, Portugal, Finland, Israel,

and for European Parliament (EP) elections in the UK. Meanwhile, open list systems are used in Luxembourg and Sweden, while STV is implemented during the Australian Senate elections and for Republic and Northern Ireland Assembly elections.

Although the STV electoral system used in Irish elections involves voters ranking candidates by preference, it does not always result in a strictly proportional allocation of seats based on quotas. For example, Fianna Fail obtained 43% of the seats with only 44% of the vote back in 1987. In case STV had been utilized during the 1997 election, rather than First-Past-the-Post (FPP) system's margin of victory being 179 seats, the Labour party would have had a majority of just 25 seats. With STV, gaining representation and membership within government requires obtaining a certain number of votes referred to as quota.

The use of multi-member constituencies allows for the representation of a broader range of views, despite the issue of larger constituencies potentially leading to a breakdown in candidate-to-people relationships. Under FPP, 70% of votes are wasted, whereas this is not the case with list systems. The two types of list systems are closed and open. In closed list systems, voters have no choice over which candidate to elect, only which party. This puts significant power in the hands of the Central party Bureaucracy, as candidates are placed in order of preference by the party leadership – with those preferred being closer to the top of the list – and seats are allocated based on the percentage of party votes.

The position on the list holds great importance, determining the individuals who will become Members of Parliament. In the past, Tony Blair

utilized this in EP elections to eliminate MEPs who did not align with his beliefs, which some criticized as a "Stalin-esque" method of removing Trotskyists. Nonetheless, closed list systems have the potential to improve representation of women and people from ethnic minorities in parliament.

The use of "white" male candidates is common among FPP parties, while ethnic minorities and women are often overlooked. Closed list systems tend to result in more representation for women and ethnic minorities in parliament. Open list systems give voters the opportunity to vote for specific candidates, with those who receive the highest number of votes securing a seat in parliament.

The current system worries critics as they believe smaller parties hold too much power. They doubt the fairness of giving equal value to redistributed votes with second or third preferences, which could benefit the Liberal Democrats who often receive voters' second choice and position them for potential success as a third-party. Propaganda linking Proportional Representation (PR) to Nazism might circulate if a referendum were held, but this claim holds no truth. The Nazis only acquired 44% of the vote and had to form a coalition government - something unnecessary under an FPP system.

According to proponents of the FPP system, it serves as a safeguard against the rise of extremist parties. This was not the case during the Weimar Republic in the 1930s under PR. They argue that if FPP had been implemented back then, Hitler would have emerged victorious with a significant margin. Moreover, FPP enables quick government action during times of crisis without having to seek approval from coalition partners. Conversely, PR does not allow for direct election of

government by voters; instead, parties engage in bargaining to form coalitions. The Bundestag is an example where FDP held a 10% balance between CDU and SPD.

The peace process in Israel showcased the considerable impact of minor political parties, even if they have less than 1% of the vote. In recent developments, the Greens replaced FDP and joined a coalition with SPD.

Although they only received 8% of the national vote, the Greens are currently in charge of Germany's foreign ministry. This illustrates how smaller parties can wield disproportionate power through coalitions. The FDP has never exceeded 10% in a national vote but has been part of a coalition with one of the two major parties since 1949. While some critics argue that proportional representation (PR) leads to weak and unstable governments, this is a matter of opinion. In Scotland, PR is utilized for elections to the Scottish Assembly, resulting in a Liberal Democrats-Labour coalition that eliminated student fees and provides free care for seniors.

Despite the fact that the majority of people desire the changes made by the Scottish government, their strength may be called into question. Italy has experienced a high number of governments formed since World War II in comparison to elections held, earning it the label "stable instability." Governments in Italy have an average lifespan of 10 months and undergo minor policy shifts with each change before being disbanded. A coalition government under PR may be viewed as weak due to policy compromises made to accommodate multiple parties. Supporters tout Germany's Additional Member System as incorporating the best elements of majority systems and plurality systems.

The Voter has the option to cast two votes,

one for a constituency candidate and the other for a party. The nation is divided into regional constituencies similar to FPP. In order to secure any seats, parties need to attain a minimum of 5% (in Germany). This is known as the Threshold and is implemented to prevent extremist parties from gaining power. Unlike Finland and Israel, which don't have a threshold, leading to the rise of extremist parties. This is exemplified by a minor party with less than 1% of votes obstructing the peace process for years in Israel.

Although imperfect, both the AMS and PR systems can generate alliances that may result in complications. In 1982, Germany experienced such an instance when the FDP abandoned their coalition with the SPD and teamed up with the CDU without seeking voters' opinions. Consequently, there was a public uproar due to a lack of participation. The efficacy of FPP versus AMS primarily depends on one's stance in parliament and political affiliations since while FPP fosters robust, efficient, and long-lasting governments, it may not represent authority from all angles.

However, none of the systems I have experienced are ideal. FPP marginalizes third parties and decisions in marginal constituencies heavily influence the political agenda. PR, on the other hand, grants disproportionate power to smaller parties, but ultimately it is the parties that determine the government through negotiations.