Should proportional representation be introduced in Westminster elections?
The current system under the Westminster elections is first-past-the-post. This is a majoritarial system in that winner-takes-all. Those who are in favour of PR argue that the FPTP system is under-representative towards minor parties and votes are then typically ‘wasted’. However those who are in favour of the FPTP system point out that it leads to a strong government, a clear outcome and keeps extremist at bay. Proportional representation is a institution of different electoral systems that produces a government based on the votes of the electorate and is proportion to the seats that the party receives. This system is different to the current Westminster formula in that the percentage of votes gained is the same as the percentage of seats received.
Those who are in favour of a better system for the Westminster elections argue that Minor parties like The Liberal Democrats are under represented as they do not achieve much of the vote through the FPTP system. Throughout the years the Labour Party and the Conservatives have been the two dominant parties benefiting from the FPTP system. places that use PR systems seem to allow better representation for all parties. The Additional member system is a type of PR that is used in the Scotland elections. In this system the electorate have two votes one for an MSP in their constituency and one for a party in their region. The first vote is done under FPTP the second vote is done under party list, additional members are then allocated to each party. In the 2007 general election of Scotland the Labour Party received better representation from the FPTP constituency vote and received 9 list seats. However the SNP received only 21 constituency seats under the FPTP system yet they received more seats from the party list (26). The conservative party were under represented as they received 4 constituency seats and only 13 list seats, this goes against...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document