First Past The Post Analysis
In what ways has First Past the Post been criticised?
In Britain our voting system is called First Past the Post (FPTP). The UK is split into 646 different constituencies and each constituency elects a single MP to enter the House of Commons. The candidate with the highest number of votes automatically wins whether they have more than 50% of the votes or not. The party that forms the government however is not decided by the number of votes they receive across the country. Instead it is determined by the number of seats they have gained throughout the constituencies. The party with the most seats becomes the next government. There are many criticisms about the FPTP system and about it's democratic values. In my opinion the main problem …show more content…
This is not a great figure to encourage the public to vote. Knowing that if they vote for any party other than either Labour or Conservative their vote will be wasted, people cannot be bothered to vote at all. This makes it harder for parties like Lib Dems because it is easier for bigger parties to win in low turn out areas. The FPTP also encourages people to cast negative votes otherwise called tactical-voting. This means that they vote against the party they dislike most rather than for the party they want to vote for. The UK's FPTP system results in a regional imbalance. Britain's 'electoral geography' means that some parties have an electoral advantage while others do not. This recently has been a problem for the conservative party. In Wales during the 2001 general election, not a single Conservative MP was elected, despite the fact overall the Party received 21% of the vote. One theory for this problem is that Conservative support is very concentrated and not as scattered as labour or Lib Dem support, therefore leaving them at a
In Britain our voting system is called First Past the Post (FPTP). The UK is split into 646 different constituencies and each constituency elects a single MP to enter the House of Commons. The candidate with the highest number of votes automatically wins whether they have more than 50% of the votes or not. The party that forms the government however is not decided by the number of votes they receive across the country. Instead it is determined by the number of seats they have gained throughout the constituencies. The party with the most seats becomes the next government. There are many criticisms about the FPTP system and about it's democratic values. In my opinion the main problem …show more content…
This is not a great figure to encourage the public to vote. Knowing that if they vote for any party other than either Labour or Conservative their vote will be wasted, people cannot be bothered to vote at all. This makes it harder for parties like Lib Dems because it is easier for bigger parties to win in low turn out areas. The FPTP also encourages people to cast negative votes otherwise called tactical-voting. This means that they vote against the party they dislike most rather than for the party they want to vote for. The UK's FPTP system results in a regional imbalance. Britain's 'electoral geography' means that some parties have an electoral advantage while others do not. This recently has been a problem for the conservative party. In Wales during the 2001 general election, not a single Conservative MP was elected, despite the fact overall the Party received 21% of the vote. One theory for this problem is that Conservative support is very concentrated and not as scattered as labour or Lib Dem support, therefore leaving them at a