• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Consider the arguments for and against retaining first-past-the-post for general elections

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Consider the arguments for and against retaining first-past-the-post for general elections The first-past-the-post system has for the last century served British politics well, if not adequately enough to be maintained unquestioned. This idea was backed by a certain amount of British arrogance. There was the assumption that the British system of government was for various reasons better than that of other Western European states. Firstly, Britain was a great political and economic power for the first half of the 20th century. Secondly, the British system has been extremely efficient in avoiding political extremism, especially at a time when both fascism and Communism were faring particularly well in much of Europe. Thirdly, the maintenance of stability and strong government where European proportionality failed. However, the emergence of a significant third party in the 70s has refuelled the arguments for change. The shortcomings of first-past-the-post were highlighted in the 1983 general election when the Liberal/SDP Alliance received 25% of the national vote, and for it got only 3.5% of the seats in parliament. This clearly seems to be unfair. Before the arguments for and against the retention of first-past-the-post for general elections can be established, the main features of the system must first be outlined. ...read more.

Middle

The adversarial two-party system has been criticised for encouraging abrupt change in policy direction. These frequent reversals of policy in important areas may be damaging to the country. A neglection of the virtues of accountability, and a multi-party government would therefore create greater consistency. It could be argued that this consistency in policy would lead to greater stability than currently present under the first-past-the-post system. The prospects for electoral reform don't look too great. The issue is fairly unimportant to the majority of the electorate. Furthermore the nature of first-past-the-post benefits the government. A party in government backing electoral reform would have to accept the fact they would probably lose seats as a result. Any serious debate about electoral reform has the possibility of being biased depending on individuals party allegiances i.e. a Liberal Democrat supporter may oppose the retention of first-past-the-post simply because it penalises their party, rather than because of an objective opinion that the current system is unfair and undesirable. Support for electoral reform grew in the Labour Party during its 18 years of opposition. However after the landslide of the 1997 election, many doubters kept quiet. ...read more.

Conclusion

As did elections for the Greater London Authority. Elections for the London Mayor were by the supplementary method. The single transferable vote is used for the newly created Northern Island Assembly and for Northern Island's elections to the European Parliament. As of 1999, the party list system is used for British elections to the European Parliament. Each of these systems is different and invariably flawed in some way. But that isn't the point. The point is why hasn't first-past-the-post been used for any of these newly created elections?. Clearly our current system isn't good enough for newly created elections. One can only assume that the only reason we still use it for general elections is the traditionally conservative British nature. Or perhaps the government realise first-past-the-post is heavily flawed but enjoy its unfairness too much to give up seats where they really count. The Jenkins report is itself the strongest argument against the retention of first-past-the-post. There is no such argument of a similar depth and intelligence which supports retaining first-past-the-post. The Conservatives commented that' accountability, strong government and a "fair" distribution of seats cannot be easily reconciled.' This may be true, but AV-Plus would get far closer to this ideal than first-past-the-post does. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. The Impact of Electoral Design on the Legislature.

    Some argue that such a system is more efficient than broad based coalitions in terms of decision making, both within the legislature and between the executive and the legislature. Because there are more participating parties than in the PM system, the likelihood of coalition governments is greater.

  2. "Recent general election results have shown the need for electoral reform." Discuss.

    The average government lasting 10 months. Governments are constantly being made and unmade, although there is only minor shifts in policies with each change. Governments formed by Coalitions under PR may be called weak as the policies are much more moderate, as two (or more) parties have to compromise policies to form a coalition.

  1. The Plurality System.

    Rather constituencies should be seen as a microcosm of society which doesn't have one person representing its views but a committee representing the views of many groups of people. He sees parliament as representative, when it reflects 'in a proportionate way, the wider society'.

  2. What are the arguments for and against electing all the members of the second ...

    If a government came to power and then didn't live up to its promises or wanted to put some legislation through the upper chamber it would be far easier than now.

  1. Minority parties in Britain call for electoral reform whereas the two major parties tend ...

    This leads to another benefit in that voters are currently able to vote for a set of policies, but coalitions mean that the policies may not be made, or are subject to change. With neither party holly in control, the concept of a responsible government is also diminished.

  2. The effect of the three consecutive general elections on the labour party

    During the 1987 and 1993 elections the Conservative party became victims to their own success, they began to believe their own hype. They were so pre occupied with Europe and getting rid of the 'wets' that her style had almost become presidential.

  1. Political accountability -Parliament and the courts

    The decision was made in a ministerial statement to the House of Commons. However, the statement failed to disclose the fact that the ban was being imposed by the use of prerogative power. This shows that ministers can fail to disclose information in statements as they know that the use

  2. Should the 1997 general election be viewed as a 'critical election'?

    a downward spiral and ever since then, the party has come to terms with being the opposition but not actually made any accountable moves to get back into power. Since the 1997 general election, the Labour party also went on to win the 2001 general election, with the Tories once again losing out.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work