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

Should the UKadopt a system of PR for General Elections?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Should the UK adopt a system of PR for General Elections? In our current system, First-Past-The-Post (FPTP), there are only two parties capable of being elected into government, the Labour and Conservative parties, perhaps including the Liberal Democrats as a potentially influential party. In our 'democratic' society, if you do not vote for one of these three parties, your vote has been wasted. There are only about 250 seats in the House of Commons that regularly veer between parties out of the 650 available, therefore, for a Labour voter in Malvern or a Conservative voter in Ebber Vale your vote has essentially been wasted, either you move to a different constituency or you change parties, otherwise your vote will effectively not count. This raises the question whether a fairer proportional representation system would lead to a fairer government, but as past examples such as the Weimar Republic have shown, proportional representation also holds problems. The result of smaller parties gaining seats is that in order to gain a majority the larger parties must form a coalition government with the smaller who then gain a disproportionate say in government as the larger party needs their support to get legislation through. No government since World War II has been elected on more than 50% of the vote, even the recent 'landslide' victory of Tony Blair's New Labour won with only 41.9% of the vote. ...read more.

Middle

3 of every 5 said the current system for governing the UK needs to be improved 'quite a lot' or 'a good deal'. A reason for reforming the current electoral system of FPTP is that in recent years the turnout to general elections has fallen dramatically. At the 1997 General Election the turnout was 71.6%, which was the lowest since the Second World War and the 2001 General Election saw a turnout of 59.4%, the lowest since 1918's 57% (a year in which many voters had still not returned to their homes after military service). The dramatic fall in turnout is seen as a result of a number of contributing factors; socio-economic pressures, demographic changes, a decline in party identification (increased from 7% in 1997 to 10% in 2001) and the electoral system. The results of the 2001 election illustrate that a strong factor in turnout is the public's perception of the importance of their vote. In safe seats, where many voters may have felt that their vote would not count or make a difference, turnouts fell very low. For example, in 1997 in Liverpool Riverside there was a turnout of 34.1% and Labour won with a 21,799 majority, in Glasgow Shettleston the turnout was 39.7% and Labour won with a majority of 15,868. ...read more.

Conclusion

The List system gives the voter a degree of choice between candidate and party and leads to highly proportional results. However, the closed-list system also tends to give the party a great degree of control in deciding which candidates will be elected from the party list. Lists also encourage minority parties, but can make it easier for extremist parties to come into power. The AMS gives voters more say than FPTP because they can vote for a person and a party. It has been successful in Germany where a coalition government has been formed between the Social Democrats and the Green Party. Under this system more votes count making it more democratic and it removes the fact that some parties are over represented in Parliament. However, the UK could benefit from adopting a new electoral system that is not proportional. There are four main approaches the UK could take. The Alternative Vote ensures that no one can be elected in a constituency unless they have at least 50% of the votes. It means that there are less wasted votes and encourages people to vote for who they support, even if they are minorities. However, it does not lead to a nationally proportional result. The Suplimentary Vote system, used to elect the Lord Major of London, also ensures that the candidate recieves over 50% of the vote. ...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. Peer reviewed

    Describe the process by which MPs are elected to Westminster. What are the ...

    4 star(s)

    An example of this is the national elections of 1997 where the Labour party gained 43.2% of the total vote cast and won 63.6% of the seats in Westminster. The combined number of votes for the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats represents 47.5% of the total votes which is nearly 4% more than labour.

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

    This gives parties a certain degree of accountability, as an unpopular government can quite easily be voted out of government at the next general elections. Proportional systems can see a minority party remain as part of the government election after election.

  1. The Impact of Electoral Design on the Legislature.

    The heart of the debate concerns the central criteria which an electoral system should meet, and whether strong and accountable government is more or less important than the inclusion of minority voices. Government Effectiveness For proponents of majoritarian system the most important criteria is government effectiveness.

  2. Would a Proportional Representation system produce a more representative and effective Government?

    PR would have changed their standing - and reduced the final Labour tally. A similar result would have been obtained in the 2001 election result with the implication that FPTP is unfair and potentially undemocratic in that the number of votes cast for the government is disproportionate to its popularity with the British public.

  1. Malta at the turn of the 19th Century.

    The professional class or better the educated Maltese were those that supported the Anti-riformisti. They gave importance to the Italian; in fact they made use of high-flown language, which didn't apply to the working class. On the extreme left, were the Riformisti that were in favour of any change and

  2. personal exercis programme

    There is also a rest period in between each station; this can simply be walking to the next station. This makes sure that the performer is working safely.

  1. Politics and Power notes on the UK system

    o The arson of holiday home in Wales owned by non Welsh families. o Arson attacks by some animal rights groups. o Obstruction of the highway eg: the Greenham common protestors. o The anti-poll tax campaign some protesters had to appear in court for non-payment of the poll tax.

  2. Who would you vote for?

    I find what the Conservatives have to say quite funny. Not for the first time they criticise Labour for their handling of private rail companies- when it was them that privatised the railways in the first place! They make vague promises about expanding rail capacity and making it the 'heart' of the transport system, but carelessly neglect to explain how.

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