Elections and electoral systems in the UK: first-past-the-post and its effects, the main proportional and majoritarian alternatives used in the UK (STV, AMS, SV), the debate over electoral reform, and the use and impact of referendums.

What this dot point is asking

You need to explain how elections and electoral systems work in the UK: the effects of first-past-the-post (FPTP), the main alternative systems used elsewhere in the UK (the single transferable vote, the additional member system and the supplementary vote), the electoral reform debate, and the use and impact of referendums. The CCEA AS 2 paper rewards precise knowledge of how each system works and a balanced judgement on reform.

First-past-the-post and its effects

FPTP has well-known effects that examiners expect you to explain and evaluate:

• Manufactured majorities. It usually turns a minority of votes (often 35 to 43 per cent) into a majority of seats, producing strong single-party government.
• Disproportionality. The seat share does not match the vote share: large parties are over-represented and smaller parties with dispersed support (such as the Liberal Democrats or, historically, UKIP) are heavily under-represented.
• Two-party system and safe seats. It favours two dominant parties, disadvantages third parties, and creates many safe seats and a smaller number of marginal seats that decide elections.
• Wasted votes. Votes for losing candidates and surplus votes for winners do not affect the result, depressing turnout in safe seats.

The alternative systems used in the UK

The UK is unusual in using several different systems for different elections, which gives a ready-made comparison for the reform debate.

• Single transferable vote (STV). A proportional system using multi-member constituencies in which voters rank candidates; surplus and eliminated votes transfer by preference. It elects the Northern Ireland Assembly, Northern Irish and Scottish local councils. It is highly proportional and gives voter choice, but is complex and can weaken the single-MP link.
• Additional member system (AMS). A hybrid: voters cast one vote for a constituency MP under FPTP and one for a party list, with top-up seats allocated to make the overall result more proportional. It elects the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd (Welsh Parliament). It balances a constituency link with proportionality but creates two classes of member.
• Supplementary vote (SV). A majoritarian system in which voters mark a first and second choice; if no candidate wins a majority, all but the top two are eliminated and second preferences are redistributed. It was used for directly elected mayors and police and crime commissioners (PCCs), though several of these have since moved to FPTP.

The electoral reform debate

The debate over replacing FPTP for Westminster pits two competing values:

• The case for reform. FPTP is unfair and disproportional, wastes millions of votes, entrenches safe seats and can hand a majority government to a party with under 40 per cent of the vote. Proportional systems are fairer and work successfully elsewhere in the UK.
• The case against reform. FPTP delivers strong, stable, accountable single-party government, a clear MP-constituency link, and a decisive way to remove a government. Proportional systems can produce weak or unstable coalitions and give small parties disproportionate bargaining power (the "kingmaker" effect).

In the 2011 referendum voters rejected replacing FPTP with the Alternative Vote by 68 to 32 per cent, which advocates of FPTP cite as settling the question and reformers attribute to a poorly run campaign on a system few wanted.

The use and impact of referendums

The UK has used major referendums increasingly since the 1990s: devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (1997 to 1998), the Good Friday Agreement (1998), the AV referendum (2011), Scottish independence (2014, rejected 55 to 45) and EU membership (2016, leave 52 to 48). They can legitimise major constitutional change and settle questions party politics cannot, and they boost participation on the day. But critics argue they undermine parliamentary sovereignty and representative democracy, oversimplify complex issues into a yes/no choice, can be swayed by money and misinformation, and may produce narrow, divisive results, as the 2016 EU vote did.

Examples in context

A model AS paragraph on FPTP and fairness might read: "The clearest charge against first-past-the-post is its disproportionality. In several recent elections a party has won an outright Commons majority on around 40 per cent of the vote, while parties with substantial but geographically dispersed support have won a tiny share of seats: this is why a system that delivers strong government is simultaneously accused of being unfair. The counter-argument is that proportional alternatives buy fairness at the price of decisive government, as the recurring coalitions in Scotland and the prolonged instability in Northern Ireland suggest. The judgement, therefore, depends on which value is prioritised: representativeness, which favours reform, or accountable single-party government, which favours the status quo." This shows the central trade-off and reaches a reasoned verdict.

Try this

Q1. Name the electoral system used for the Northern Ireland Assembly and one used for the Scottish Parliament. [2 marks]

• Cue. The single transferable vote for the Assembly; the additional member system for the Scottish Parliament.

Q2. Explain two arguments against the use of referendums in the UK. [6 marks]

• Cue. They undermine parliamentary sovereignty and representative democracy, and they oversimplify complex issues into a binary choice that can be swayed by money or misinformation.

Q3. To what extent does first-past-the-post serve the UK well? [24 marks]

• Cue. Weigh strong single-party government and the constituency link against disproportionality, wasted votes and safe seats. Reach a substantiated judgement.