Is Britain a two-party or a multi party system, or something else?

Authors Avatar

Nikki Broadbent

Is Britain a two-party or a multi party system, or something else?

Britain has traditionally been viewed as a two-party system, and some argued that still today – despite growing support for other parties at national election time, Britain will always be a two party system.  And it can be argued that for the two main parties – The Conservative Party and The Labour Party – have been, and still are, the only real contenders for power in British General Elections.  Paul Webb in “The Modern British Party System” “…only two parties in the system really ‘count’”.  He says that two parties “absorb most of the votes cast in elections and consequently able to dominate the business of government”.

However, Andrew Heywood, in “Britain’s Dominant Party System” states that “…the conventional view that Britain possesses a two-party system had been under attack since February 1974”.  Webb and Fisher in “The Changing British Party System: Two-Party Equilibrium or the Emergence of Moderate Pluralism” agree, stating that “…the two major parties absorbed approximately 90 per cent of the vote until 1970…However, since the middle of the 1970s this system has been challenged by a…multi-dimensional debate”. 

In this essay therefore, I will identify the different arguments regarding Britain’s electoral and parliamentary systems that encourage differing party systems including the two aforementioned systems, “the two party systems” and “the multi party system”.  I will also look at the idea behind a “dominant party system”, and why these arguments would be attributed to Britain including arguments of class, gender and religion.

In “The Modern British Party System” Paul Webb says that between 1945 and 1970 there is a ‘clear-cut…’two-partism”.  He comes to this conclusion, he says, by a formula developed by Markku Laakso and Rein Taagepera (1979) in which you calculate ‘“on the basis of party share of the popular vote (the effective number of electoral parties [ENEP]…and the basis of shares of seats won in parliament (the effective number of parliamentary parties [ENPP].”’  If the system is made up from two equally strong parties, the ‘effective number’ is 2.0, and similarly a system with three equally strong parties will generate an effective number of 3.0.

The results from this equation shows that between 1945 and 1970 the effective number turned out using ENPP were 2.05 between 1945 and 1970, but post-1970 this number increased to 2.18.  Using ENEP, the 1945-1970 number was 2.36 to an increased number of 3.17 post-1970.

The social reason why this formula illustrates a two-party system can be summarised in three main points according to Webb.  Firstly he agrees a concept called ‘a centripetal pattern of competition’ as the major parties seek to win votes from the median voters.  It is in parties’ interests to appeal to the widest demographic of the electorate, that way enabling them a chance in receiving the most votes.  In contrast, if parties adopt a strong political ideology for either the left or right, you have only the option to be voted for by people on the political right or left extremes, rather than the majority in the middle and subsequently less chance of victory.  Though Webb states that this doesn’t mean that post-1945 the main parties lack distinctive ideologies, and that centripetal patterns shift with time (a notable example during the mid-1980s), he asserts that “parties departing from the logic or centripetal competition are met with electoral disappointment and have eventually sought a return to the centre” the most notable example being New Labour in the 1990s.

Join now!

Secondly he argues, that competition in elections can only seriously contend between two parties because of the adoption of the “winner takes all” approach and the “refusal of majority parties to share executive office with rivals”.  He says that “even on the rare occasions since 1945 when the largest single party has not been able to command an overall majority in the Commons, it has been the norm to continue in office as a minority administration rather than to seek to form a coalition”.

Finally explained is that “two-partism is defined by a regular alternation in power of the major ...

This is a preview of the whole essay