Any alternative system to FPTP would produce a result which was more accurately representative of the votes made. The current system has heavily been criticised for not being proportional and therefore being unfair towards some parties. For example in the 2005 election the Conservatives received about 800,000 votes less than the Labour Party however the difference in seats was 158. If the same amount of votes were received under PR, the seat difference would be much closer and therefore could have led to a coalition government, it also brings in the argument to give other parties such as the Liberal Democrats a better chance of gaining more seats.
On the other hand, there are many arguments against reform too. The Westminster elections have been using the simple plurality system for over 60 years now and the argument of ‘if it is not broken don’t try to fix it’ comes in to play. The argument is that this system is currently working well and most voters understand the system well too, bringing in a totally new system could possibly confuse voters and therefore the government would rather be safe than sorry and continue to use a system that is working well.
FPTP also delivers strong, single party governments with good working majorities. This means that we are ensured a long lasting government rather than having a weak coalition. In other EU countries such as Italy and Belgium, under the PR, there have been many coalitions that have not lasted very long, therefore have quite a political impact on the state. However, in the Westminster elections we are almost guaranteed a good strong majority government which will most likely stay in power for its full five year term, therefore securing policies for a good period of time, rather than having altering policies every so often due to the failure of a coalition government.
The current system also ensures that we will get what we voted for. Political parties put out a manifesto before elections outlining what policies they will introduce if they are elected into power. As the FPTP ensures a strong government, the people will get the policies they voted for. However, under PR, where a coalition government is likely, conflict of ideas will also be likely making it harder to pass legislature, therefore it will probably mark the end of the manifesto system and therefore it will make voters unsure of what they are exactly voting for.
There are good arguments for and against of an electoral reform and although the PR system offers the chance to make every vote count, the FPTP system has been working very well for such a long period now that it would be undesirable to change it now. The FPTP system ensures we get a government, and that is the most important part of an electoral system and it is currently ensuring that we do get a government, so it is fit for purpose and therefore it would be better if this system was not abandoned.
