First-Past-The-Post Voting

First-Past-the-Post voting system

The first-past-the-post voting system tends to result in a two-party system in which two major parties compete for office. The system tends to favour the two biggest, most established parties, the Labour and Conservative Party in the UK, which already have the majority of the country’s support. This makes it quite difficult for new or smaller parties to gain seats in parliament.

Historically, the FPTP system has resulted in one party winning a clear majority of seats in Parliament during a general election. This means the winning party can go on to form what is called a 'majority government' and put their plan for the country into action without relying on the support of other parties. If the party fails to win a majority of seats, it may need to form what is called a 'minority government' or a coalition.

First-Past-the-Post voting example

Let's have a look at how FPTP works by using the results of the 2017 UK general election

Let's start by saying that, in the UK, to have a majority government, the winning party has to have 326 seats (elected Members of Parliament, or MPs) From the table above, we can see that in this election, the winning party was the Conservative Party, as they got the biggest share of the votes. However, as they did not reach the required number of seats to form a majority government, the result was a 'hung parliament'. In order to govern, they entered what was called a 'supply and confidence' agreement with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), meaning the DUP's MPs supported the government's proposals in parliament.

First-Past-the-Post voting system UK

In the UK, the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system is used for general elections and most local government elections in England and Wales.

The UK is divided into geographical constituencies, which could cover anything from an entire county to a district of a large city. Each of these constituencies elects one representative, or Member of Parliament (MP), to the House of Commons. The boundaries of each constituency are determined by independent commissions, who recommend changes to boundaries every five years. Changes may be due to increases or decreases in population or changes in local government boundaries. Both Houses of Parliament need to agree to any changes being made.

Fig. 2 A FPTP ballot paper for UK local councillors elections

One of the Liberal Democrats' main policies is to change the electoral system, as they have long argued for the benefits of the proportional representation system. Proportional representation would also likely result in them receiving more seats in Parliament.

Following the 2010 UK general election, the Conservative party and the Liberal Democrats formed a coalition government. The coalition agreement included holding a referendum to let the UK population choose whether to keep the FPTP system or whether to introduce the Alternative Vote system.

First Past the Post pros and cons

Now let's have a look at some pros and cons of this system.

First-Past-the-Post pros

The advantages of the first-past-the-post system include:

• Simplicity: It is simple to understand and operate this type of voting system. Voters only vote for one candidate, and counting the votes is simple. Additionally, voters are already familiar with the system, as it has been around since the 19th century.

• Price: It is a relatively low-cost system that is effective.

• Speedy: The process of counting the votes, so finding out which candidate is elected can be determined quickly after the polls close.

• Clear outcome: FPTP voting systems usually result in a clear winner. The party that gained the most votes often gets the majority of seats.

• Representation: FPTP allows voters to clearly express their views on which party they believe should form the next government. Single-member constituencies typically provide a straightforward relationship between voters and their representatives.

• Two-party system benefits: First-past-the-post is ideal for two-party systems, where it generally leads to a strong single-party government. Single-party governments with working majorities typically assert their control over the legislative and policymaking processes, meaning that they will most likely do what they have promised and act predictably during times of crisis.

• Single-party government: generally, single-party governments do not rely on the support of other parties to pass legislation, meaning they can fulfil their mandates.

• Keeps out extremist points of view: the FPTP system makes it harder for far-right or far-left parties to win seats in parliament, and to therefore gain an access to greater publicity.

First-Past-the-Post cons

The disadvantages of the first-past-the-post system include:

• Disproportionate outcomes: The number of seats won by parties does not reflect the number of votes received. Representatives can get elected with relatively low levels of public support, while parties who achieve almost the same result end up with far fewer seats in parliament.

• Votes are weighted unequally: constituency sizes vary, meaning that votes have different values attributed to them. For example, a vote cast in a small constituency is likely to have a larger impact on the outcome rather than a single vote in a larger constituency.

• Tactical voting: The FPTP system can encourage tactical voting. Voters, instead of voting for the candidate they like, vote for the candidate with the highest chance of preventing the candidate they dislike from winning the seat.

• Limited choice: FPTP can strictly limit voters’ choice of candidates, as only one candidate stands for each party, meaning voters cannot choose between different candidates within the same party.

• Creates electoral deserts: FPTP can lead to electoral deserts in certain parts of the country where a party has little to no representation at all. This area is then effectively ignored by the party, for instance, the party ignores campaigning in the area, which also leads to new politicians moving away from that area if they wish to become influential within that party.

• Excludes smaller parties: the FPTP system can greatly exclude smaller parties from winning seats, especially if their voters are thinly spread over several different constituencies. It's possible for a party to have significant public support on a national level, but to never win any seats, as their votes are not concentrated in one geographically constituency.