FPTP

FPTP

1. Used in general elections in the UK

   • The country id divivded into 650 constituencies. in each constituency, a seperate election is held where the main parties put up candidates for each constituencies.
   • The candidate with the most votes in each constituency becomes the MP. The winner of the election as a whole is the party with the most MP's. To be a successful government you need a clear and large majority

2. ADVANTAGES

   • produces a strong and stable government.
     • 2005 election: Labour won a majority of 66 with 35.3%. This enabled them to have a comfortable majority with the potential ability to introduce new laws.
     • unlikely to produce a coalition government
       • failed to produce a single party government, twice since ww2.
         • this was Feb 1974 and May 2010
           • Enabling the 'Doctrine of the Mandate' to exist in British Politics, the voters can judge how well parties stick to their promises
       • They are seen as weak and ineffective, The different parties that form together often find it difficult to agree on policies and the arguments create a weak government.
         • It is also argued that no voters will get what they wanted because legislation will be compromised between two political ideologies.
   • There is a clear link between MP and constituency.
     • 2005 election: John Baron elected for Billericay. The people in the constituency know who to turn to if they need help and it protects the interests of the constituency.

3. DISADVANTAGES

   • produces unfair results (unproportional)
     • FEB 1974: Cons won 37.8% and 297 seats and Labour won 37.1% and got 301 seats
       • 1951: Labour won 48.8% and gained 295 seats. Whereas, conservatives won 48% of the vote and got 321 seats.
     • leads to wasted votes
       • Once an MP for a constituency has been elected, every other vote cast for that candidate is wasted. This means that in a safe seat, an MP could win 60-70% of the vote but this does not benefit the party. On the other hand, votes for the opposing candidate are also candidate are also wasted as they have no bearing on the national result
   • discriminates against smaller and gives power to major parties
     • 'one horse race'
       • either Cons or Lab will always win and very unlikely for Lib Dems or smaller parties
         • Lib Dems done consistently bad under FPTP. In 1983, the alliance won 25.4% winning only 23 seats. Compared to Labour winning 27.6% 5of the vote and winning 209 seats.
   • Although it is argued to produce a strong government, this ca n be seen as a weakness.
     • in 2005, Labour won a majority of 66 with 35.3% of the vote and a 61% turnout. This is an elective dictatorship as they has the right to bypass laws that could radically change Britain.
   • FPTP now favours Labour.
     • gained a 66 seat majority in 2005 biased compared to Cons in 2010, winning only a 21 seat majority on 14 million votes.
       • constitiuency size: The average constituency size won by Labour is usually smaller
       • turnout tends to be lower on Labour held seats
       • tactical voting: many people were voting anti-conservative in 1997,2001 and 2005.

4. FPTP leads to a single party government battle between Conservative and Labour. It has also shown how there is long-periods of one party rule. EG: The Cons between 1979 and 1997.

   • MAY ELECTION 2005
     • Labour only had a 3% lead on Cons yet it one 159 more seats.
       • The cons won many more votes but 92 fewer seats. This is because Labour wins votes in urban areas and constituencies on Wales and Scotland where they are normally larger
         • The smaller parties still suffer. Although the Lib Dems increased their MPS, UKIP, Green and BNP still failed to gain a single seat.
   • 2015 ELECTION
     • Despite gaining 12.6%, UKIP still only won 1 seat.
     • SNP won 50% of the vote in Scotland and that translated to 94% of the seats
   • 2010 ELECTION PROVIDED A COALITION GOVERNMENT!- argued that FPTP is becoming less efffective?
     • Both Cons and Lab reached a post ww2 low of 65%
       • whereas, Lib Dem reached a high share of the vote since 1923.