HIGHER MODERN STUDIES ESSAY WRITING REVISION
TITLE: Proportional representation (PR) systems are fairer than FPTP. Discuss.
PARAGRAPH 1: Problems with FPTP
• Encourages a two party system in Britain, squeezes out smaller parties such as the
Greens.
• FPTP can be unfair. The 2015 general election COULD BE described as one of the
most unfair election result of all time. It produces elected dictatorships; in 2015 the
Conservatives got 51% of the seats with 36.9% of the votes.
• FPTP doesn’t produce a proportional result. In 2015, the SNP gained 56 seats which is
8.6% of the seats with only 4.7% of the vote.
• FPTP penalises smaller Parties. In 2015 Election, UKIP got 12.6% of the vote but only
0.15% of the seats. This equates to 1 MP. SNP achieved 56 seats with 4% of the vote.
• FPTP means that all votes are not of equal value: voters in marginal’s are v. important
to politicians as marginal’s decide the election
• Under FPTP, the voters have little choice. If a Labour voter does not like the Labour
candidate, he or she has no real choice.
• FPTP leads to wasted votes.
PARAGRAPH 2:
Benefits of AMS
• Not all voters in Scotland support established parties. AMS gives supporters of the
smaller parties such as the Greens a say in how the country is run. 2003 Greens won 7
seats in Scot Parliament.
• The results are broadly proportional. The second vote gives a level of proportionality.
• AMS usually leads to coalition government but this may be a v. good thing. Some
people think that the Lib Dem-Labour compromise over tuition fees is an example of a
sensible decision made by two partners in government. “Partnership Agreement”
• However 2007 and 2011 did not result in coalition governments. SNP have 69 seats
and can pass their own legislation in the Scottish Parliament e.g. minimum unit price
for alcohol
• In AMS, every vote is recycled, giving every voter in every constituency an incentive to
vote. There is no such thing as a “wasted vote”.
• Single issue candidates make an impact e.g. Dr Jean Turner won a seat in the Scottish
Parliament in 2003 as part of her campaign to stop the closure of Stobhill Hospital.
Margo MacDonald an Independent in Lothian.
• AMS can be a way to increase the numbers of women or ethnic minority MSPs in
parliament. Bashir Ahmad was placed at the top of the SNP party list for the Glasgow
region in 2007 and was elected.
• The representation of women has been particularly impressive as approx. 34% of
MSP’s are women compared to 18% of MP’s
Benefits of STV
• STV allows voters to get their views represented
• Few wasted votes as votes are recycled- No need for tactical voting
• Voters can choose between candidates both of their own party and other parties.
Allows them to express preferences between candidates. Empowers voters not
political parties
• Coalition governments in which representatives from different parties work together
• STV encourages more female and ethnic minority participation e.g. Khalil Malik (SNP
Glasgow)
• STV is more proportional which is fairer
• STV gives smaller parties a better chance E.G. The Greens. In 2007 the Greens won
their first seats on Scottish Councils
• Independent action groups can obtain seats e.g. Save St John’s Hospital group won 3
seats on West Lothian Council in 2007
PARAGRAPH 3:
Problems with AMS
• MSP turf wars? Who is the “real” MSP for your area: the constituency MSP or one of
the seven list MSP’s? Constituency MSPs think of themselves as the “real” MSP’s and
often resent the “encroachment” of list MSP’s on their turf.
• Parties more powerful than voters. Voters have no say in choosing candidates or
where candidates are placed on the party list. Party activists pick the party’s 7
candidates and place them on the party list.
• Government no-one voted for. For example, the Lib Dem’s finished 4th in the 2003
Scottish Parliament election. They formed a coalition with Labour. Lib-Dem’s were
seen as “kingmakers.”
• There are no by-elections for list MSPs and this can lead to un-elected MSP’s e.g.
SNP MSP Stefan Tymkewycz stood down as an MSP just months after being elected
to Holyrood.
He was replaced by Shirley-Anne Somerville as a Lothians list MSP in August 2007.
• AMS is not 100% proportional
Problems with STV
• STV has no facility for by-elections
• STV encourages divisions within political parties
• Coalitions are often seen as compromise politics with “ Kingmakers”
• STV perceived as being complex
• Does not always guarantee proportionality
• The number of women councillors did not dramatically change with the introduction of
STV. It dropped from 21.8% in 2003 to 21.6% in 2007
PARAGRAPH 4: Benefits of FPTP
• FPTP is the traditional UK electoral system. Voters are familiar with it and it is easy to
understand.
• It is cheap and it produces quick results - polls close at 10.00 pm and most results are
in by 2.00 am.
• FPTP usually gives one party a fairly comfortable majority. The key word here is
usually. General Elections; 1979, 1983, 1987, 1992, 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2015 all
produced a decisive result
• That party can then form a fairly strong and stable government for the next 5 years.
• FPTP usually produces stable government which is good for the economy. Business
likes to know what interest rates, currency rates, inflation rates are going to be over the
long term.
• But 2010 delivered a Conservative- Liberal Democrat coalition government.
