Different Types of Electoral System and the UK.
BTEC Public ServicesGovernment Pass Grade Contents Introduction . The current voting systems in the UK: a brief explanation. . First past the Post 2. Supplementary Vote 3. Single Transferable Vote 4. Additional Member System 5. Party List System . Advantages and Disadvantages of the various electoral processes. . Advantages and Disadvantages of the “First Past the Post” (FPTP). 2. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Supplementary Vote (VS) System. 3. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Single Transferable Vote (STV). 4. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Additional Member System (AMS). 5. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Party list (Close List/Open List). . Where this different systems are used (nationally and in internationally) . My Opinion about the various voting systems. ________________ Introduction This assignment will try to explain the several electoral systems or ways used by the members of the public when voting for the different level of power elections. I will try to show that for the each election a different system is used. I will also try to explain and clarify what is the “the “First Past the Post”, the Supplementary Vote, the “Single Transferable Vote”, the “Additional Member System” and the “Party List System”. . The current voting systems in the UK: a brief explanation. . First past the Post In a way it’s
To What Extent Are Backbench MPs Lobby Fodder?
To What Extent Are Backbench MPs Lobby Fodder? We’re led to believe that the MPs we elect to form Parliament actively participate in the governing of our country. Yet in reality, most of the power lies with the executive and the influence of a backbencher is thus lessened. Are they a loyal party drone? Do they represent the constituents effectively? Have they been reduced to mere lobby fodder? The “Whip” is sent weekly to MPs detailing the upcoming parliamentary business. Divisions are ranked in order of importance by the number of times it’s underlined. Three-line whips apply to major events and defying these may result in being denied places on select committees and promotion or the withdrawal of the whip. Essentially this is blackmail, and it often works, turning backbenchers into sheep who will follow the whips. In addition to this, some often neither feel strongly about, nor fully know the facts about the subject being discussed in Parliament. Therefore when it comes to a division, most are grateful that they’re told what to do, and gladly become feed for the Lobbies. However backbenchers can and do rebel in order to assert their power. Cameron experienced his first defeat over the EU Budget last week, with more than 50 Tory MPs rebelling. There was majority of 13, in favour of a rebel Tory call led by Mark Reckless for a real terms cut in the European
To what extent is Britain a liberal democracy?
Politics Assignment one To what extent is Britain a liberal democracy Student's name: LU ZHEYU (MERCURY) Student number: LUZ11125509 Lecturer's name: JOHN BARRY Submission date： Through a long way of development, current democracy separate to two main forms. The direct democracy is describe the people are directly involved into making decisions. Relatively, representative democracy is defined instead people making decisions by themselves they elect specific number of people to represent them to making decisions. Liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy where citizens are given certain rights and freedoms. It is a system of governing a country meanwhile the power of the government is limited. A liberal democracy is combine three basic types of power the first is legislative. In the United Kingdom the Parliament plays a same role to make new laws and to reform those already in existence. Second is executive power, in the United Kingdom this power has been granted to the government and its department. Last is judicial power, in the United Kingdom, these ranges from the House of Lords, the high-test appeal court, to local courts over control magistrates. These power is use to explain laws and to make judgments about whether people have been broken or not. In addition, separate power is a main feature for a liberal democratic country, because of separate
Democracy and Elections in the UK
Lee Gouldsbrough Unit 1: government policies and the public service Democracy Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives this is because we are a society based on equality of opportunity and individual merit. It’s a system of welfare and retribution aimed at narrowing social inequalities and it is a system of decision making based upon a majority rule. Here is a list of the levels of politics starting from the lowest first: . Local (councillors) 2. Regional 3. National 4. European 5. International 6. Multinational 7. Global Several variants of democracy exist, but there are two basic forms, both of which concern how the whole body of all eligible citizens executes its will. One form of democracy is direct democracy. This is where people vote on a policy initiatives directly, as opposed to a representative democracy in which people vote for representative who then vote on policy initiatives, e.g.: ancient Rome, modern Switzerland and USA at federal level. Another type of democracy is representative democracy this is a variety of democracy found on the principle of elected people representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy. Three countries which use this democracy are the United States of America which is a presidential republic, the United Kingdom which is a
From what extent does the UK suffer from a participation crisis?
To what extent does Democracy in the United Kingdom suffer from ‘participation crisis’? There has been a decline in turnout at UK general elections and in other forms of political participation for over half a century now, but does it amount to a suffering democracy in a participation crisis. Key forms of participation, such as voting and party membership have declined significantly over time but other, newer, faster forms of participation has arisen and are rapidly becoming more popular to the newer generations. The problem is, do these new forms damage the heart of our nation, the Democracy? ‘Popular engagement with the formal processes and institutions of democracy has been in long-term decline since the 1960s’. The decline in electoral turnout is perhaps the most obvious reason why there seems to be a crisis of democracy in Britain. At 59.4 per cent, the turnout in the 2001 election was the lowest in over half a century. And it is not just at general elections that turnout has fallen. They has also been constantly lower at local and European elections held since 1997. But voting at elections is only one way of participating in politics. Another is taking to the streets. And it would seem that this has not gone out of fashion. The demonstrations against the Iraq war in February 2003 involved an estimated 4 per cent of people in Britain. There have been large
How does a Parliamentary system differ from a Presidential system?
How does a Parliamentary system differ from a Presidential system? There are many differences between a parliamentary government and a presidential system of government. The biggest difference is the principle of separation of powers; in a parliamentary system, the executive (the PM and/or the cabinet) is usually drawn from the legislature and/or is dependant on the legislature for its mandate (the legislature must have "confidence" in the government). In a presidential system the executive (the president and the cabinet) are totally separate from the legislature and are not dependant on the legislature for confidence. Many forms of government are used by countries around the world, and very few governments are completely alike, even if they use the same type of system. Presidential and parliamentary systems of government can vary in specific details from one country to another, but certain general aspects typically are the same in countries that have the same type of system. For example, in some parliamentary systems, the national legislative body is called a parliament, and in others, it might be called by a term such as "national assembly," but they generally serve the same purposes, regardless of their names. Likewise, the specific powers or duties of presidents might vary from country to country, but they generally are all elected by the people and are separate from
![The advantages of a codified constitution now outweigh the disadvantages. Discuss [40 marks]](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/1211006/listing/1211006_1.jpg)
The advantages of a codified constitution now outweigh the disadvantages. Discuss [40 marks]
The advantages of a codified constitution now outweigh the disadvantages. Discuss [40 marks] A codified constitution is a constitution made up of a set of laws that an individual or set of people have made and agreed upon for governmental use and is most importantly documented in a single place. In theory, the documentation of a codified constitution appears to make minimal difference to the executive and judiciary system, however, in common practice the advantages of a codified constitution in present day UK in regards to the executive, judiciary and society as a whole do not outweigh the disadvantages. This is due the fact that many of the issues which point toward the advantages of a codified constitution, such as modernization, rights and adaptability also reveal distinct social and political disadvantages to the incorporation of a codified constitution; ultimately the use of other tenuous links fail to alter the fact that the advantages of a codified constitution do not outweigh the disadvantages at the present moment in time. The choice facing the country is therefore whether to adopt the sort of explicit, formal supreme law typified by documents such as the United States Constitution. The alternative is to retain the status quo of its constitution consisting of a variety of informal codes and conventions, many of them unwritten, which guide the political and legal
To what extent would the coalition's proposals for House of Lords reform have been advantageous to British Democracy?
Christela Dewan To what extent would the coalition's proposals for House of Lords reform have been advantageous to British Democracy? The Coalition’s proposals for House of Lords reform was that the government wanted four-fifths of members of a reformed House of Lords to be elected. They would serve 15-year terms of office and could not run for re-election after their term ends. The peers were to represent a specific region of the United Kingdom and one-third of seats would be available for every 5 years. The coalition also wanted to nearly halve the number of peer’s form 826 to 450, while also change the name of the House of Lords but the idea was rejected. 12 of the remaining unelected peers were to be Church of England bishops and the rest were to be appointed with all the hereditary peers being removed. First of all, majority of the House of Lords being elected would boost the democracy and legitimacy of the House of Lords dramatically. The peers will have earned popular consent, therefore enabling them to act more independently rather than being in a way pressured to side with the government because they have been appointed by the Prime Minister or because they have no democratic legitimacy. They can scrutinise and influence the government more because they too have democratic legitimacy just like the government which means they can challenge and keep the
There is no such thing as a perfect electoral system Discuss.
‘There is no such thing as a perfect electoral system’ Discuss. An electoral system is the way in which the electorate choose or ‘elect’ a candidate to represent them in their country’s government. In the UK we see lots of different electoral systems such as FPTP, STV, the List system and AMS. Other electoral systems include SV, and while AV has been suggested it has never been used. All the electoral systems have different strengths and weaknesses; this essay will look at the strengths and weaknesses of some of these electoral systems while evaluating them against the Jenkins criteria, to see if there is such a thing as a ‘perfect electoral system’. FTPT is the main electoral system used in the UK, used at local and national levels for the general election. It’s a simple plurality system which means the candidate only needs one more vote than their competitors to win. Evaluating this system against the Jenkins criteria we see that FPTP isn’t proportional and this is because the system is favourable to larger parties as their support is concentrated in more areas, whereas smaller parties’ support is almost scattered across the country. This is shown in the 2010 general election results as UKIP received 919, 546 votes but didn’t win any seats whereas SNP received 491, 386 votes and won 6 seats. The term ‘winners bonus’ is used to show the exaggerated
Should referendums be more widely spread across the UK?
Should referendums be more widely spread across the UK? (25marks) Many argue that the use of a referendum should be more widely spread in the UK. A referendum is a general vote by the electorate on a single political question that has been referred to them for a direct decision. Referendums provide a way for the public to have direct influence on the legislative process. They are a perfect example of the direct democracy in the modern society. Other arguments for referendums include being localising decision making and legitimising decisions made by the government. Arguments against include the incompetence of the people voting, turnouts being too low for outcomes to be legitimate, and finally referendums can lead to tyranny of the majority. So for the reasons above I do not believe that referendums should be more widely spread in the UK. One reason for supporting the wider use of referendums is that they are a good way of localising decision making. The government may not always be able to focus on every individual and their interests. So for this reason referendums should be more widely spread. An example of a time when a decision was needed to be made locally was the referendum in 1998 on whether London should have a mayor. By having a referendum the decision was made by the people it would affect, rather than by politicians who may not have the same opinion as
