3.1.3 Comparing FPTP with Electoral Systems in Devolved Assemblies

Impact on Governments and the Type of Government

Proportional Systems and Coalition Governments

• Increased Formation of Coalition or Minority Governments: Proportional systems like AMS (Additional Member System) lead to more frequent coalition or minority governments.
• Northern Ireland: Coalition governments are integral to the Good Friday Agreement, promoting cooperation among various parties.
• Scotland and Wales: Both have experienced coalition and majority governments due to proportional systems, reflecting diverse political landscapes.
• Debate on UK-Wide Elections: These experiences have sparked discussions about adopting proportional systems like AMS for UK-wide elections.

Regional Impacts

• Wales and Scotland: Enjoy greater legislative autonomy and a shift towards a 'reserved matters' model of governance, which mirrors Scotland's model of devolved powers.
• Northern Ireland: Stability issues are more related to historical tensions rather than the electoral system itself.

Impact on Parties and Party Systems

Increased Competition

• More Parties Competing Successfully: Proportional systems allow for greater competition, enabling a range of parties to gain influence.
• Nationalist and Unionist Parties: Parties such as the SNP, Plaid Cymru, DUP, and Sinn Féin have gained significant influence under proportional systems.
• Impact on Other Parties: Systems like AMS have also benefited other parties, such as the Conservatives in Scotland.

Electoral Success and Representation

• Broader Representation: Proportional systems enhance representation but may lead to smaller parties appearing over-represented.

Electoral Trends (1999-2017)

• Scottish Parliament: Varying performances by SNP, Labour, and Conservative parties.
• National Assembly for Wales: Similar trends with Labour, Plaid Cymru, and other parties.
• Northern Irish Assembly: DUP and Sinn Féin have dominated with periodic shifts in power.

Impact on Voters and Voter Choice

Voter Turnout and Choice

• Increased Turnout: Proportional systems can potentially improve voter turnout by reducing wasted votes and providing more choice.
• Greater Choice: Systems like AMS, SV (Supplementary Vote), and STV (Single Transferable Vote) offer voters more options compared to FPTP (First-Past-The-Post).
• Preference Voting: Voters can express multiple preferences and are not confined to a single major party, enhancing democratic engagement.

Debate: Should FPTP be Replaced for UK General Elections?

Yes

• Unrepresentative and Undemocratic: FPTP often fails to reflect the proportion of votes, resulting in a 'strong' government without majority support.
• Wasted Votes: Smaller parties and votes are often wasted, leading to inequality and potentially reduced voter turnout.
• Lack of Choice: The system undermines pluralist democratic principles by limiting voter choice.

No

• Familiar and Understandable: FPTP is well understood by voters and tends to encourage turnout.
• Strong and Stable Governments: Historically produces strong and stable governments, like the Conservative majority in 2015.
• Influence of Small Parties: Small parties can still exert significant influence even within the FPTP system.
• Geographical Representation: Maintains a crucial link between geographical areas and their representatives, important for local representation.

The Nature of UK Government Under Different Systems

FPTP

• Tends to Produce: Single-party majority governments.

AMS

• Tends to Produce: Coalition or minority governments due to proportional representation.

STV

• Tends to Produce: Coalition governments with proportional representation.

Comparing FPTP with Electoral Systems in Devolved Assemblies

Feature	First Past the Post (FPTP)	Additional Member System (AMS)	Single Transferable Vote (STV)
Type of System	Plurality/Majoritarian	Mixed (Combination of FPTP and Proportional)	Proportional
How Votes Are Cast	One vote per voter for a single candidate	Two votes: one for a constituency representative and one for a party list	Ranked choice (voters rank candidates in order of preference)
How Seats Are Allocated	Candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins	Constituency seats filled by FPTP; additional seats filled proportionally from party lists	Seats are distributed according to voters' ranked preferences and quotas
Used In	UK General Elections	Scottish Parliament, Welsh Senedd, London Assembly	Northern Ireland Assembly, Scottish local elections, Republic of Ireland
Proportionality	Low (Disproportionality is common)	Medium (Mix of proportional and majoritarian)	High (More proportional to the votes cast)
Representation of Smaller Parties	Poor (Smaller parties struggle to win seats)	Better (Smaller parties gain representation through the list system)	Strong (Smaller parties and independents often win seats)
Link Between MPs and Constituents	Strong (One MP per constituency)	Mixed (Constituency MPs with list members who don't represent a specific area)	Weaker (Larger multi-member constituencies)
Chance of Majority Government	High (Often leads to single-party majority governments)	Lower than FPTP but higher than STV	Low (Coalitions more likely)
Voter Choice	Limited (Voters choose one candidate)	Moderate (Voters choose a candidate and a party)	High (Voters rank multiple candidates by preference)
Likelihood of Tactical Voting	High (Voters often vote tactically to avoid splitting the vote)	Moderate	Low (Ranking candidates reduces the need for tactical voting)
Complexity	Simple	Moderate complexity	More complex (Requires understanding of ranking and transfers)
Spoiled Ballots	Low (Simple voting process)	Moderate (Due to two votes)	Moderate to High (Ranking system can lead to mistakes)