• 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.

    He feels the country would be more representative divided into large multi-seat constituencies rather than many small single seat constituencies. This type of system can produce an 'elective dictatorship' whereby a party can be held in power for a long time by a large majority, even with a small % of the vote.

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

    Aside from all the moral and political arguments against electing the whole of the upper house there is also a practical element. The current lords are paid a menial amount in the form of expenses whilst undertaking their duties and responsibilities as lords.

  1. America has a two-party political system.

    The measure was eventually passed by Congress attached to another piece of legislation after being sent back by the House of Representatives for it to be adjusted; mainly through the persistence of James Madison, another republican. It is important to discuss Thomas Jefferson at this point as he will become extremely important in the development of the early Republican Party.

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

    This was primarily why the party suffered defeat again in 2001, and have failed to show the type of unity Labour expressed when they came into power. An example of both poor leadership and party divides was when the party forced the resignation of their leader Iain Duncan Smith.

  1. Russia - political past, present and future

    It did not separate church and the state. The Orthodox Church still held strong power, while in Europe the Catholic Church during the eighteen hundreds had little if no influence on the government. Thus the political secularization did not occur, which was a tremendous disadvantage in Russia's development.

  2. Civil Service Reform.

    Managers in pursuit of financial/efficiency targets are free to pursue value-for-money initiatives. Gray and Jenkins point out that, '... the Next Steps programme assumes that good management requires a discipline of targets both to focus and motivate managers and to assess performance.

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