The aim of this page is to compare the various voting systems which are used, or could be used, to elect Members to Parliament - see comparison table |
‘First Past the Post' is the electoral system we use in a UK General Election. The election is divided up into separate contests in local areas, constituencies. Voters are asked to choose a candidate to be the local representative in parliament. Candidates may (or may not) be representatives of political parties. The direct result of a General Election is the election of new MPs to the House of Commons. The indirect consequence, but the main purpose of the election, is the choice of a party to form the Government, and the selection of the Prime Minister follows from this. The result of any election depends on many factors, but it is easy to forget that one of the major factors is the electoral system that is used. Electoral systems differ in the way they translate national votes into legislative seats. The result of an election depends in part on how people vote, but also in part on how the votes are counted. Majoritarian systems such as First Past the Post (FPTP) may produce an election result with a big difference between the share of the votes each party wins in the election, and the share of votes that each party has in the parliament. Proportional Representation (PR) systems try to reduce the disparity between a party's percentage of the national vote and its share of the parliamentary votes. With a PR Voting system if a party wins 30% of the votes in the country it should win approximately 30% of the votes in the Parliament.
First Past the Post (FPTP) An underlying feature of FPTP is that in an FPTP election votes are cast for different individual candidates. The purpose of the election is to elect a person to represent the constituency (local area). This is not directly a vote for a political party. However candidates are usually also representatives of their political parties. In the election there is only one winner. For convenience it is said that the Party of the MP wins the constituency, but this is only indirectly the case because technically it is the individual who wins. A weakness of such an electoral system is that it cannot be certain whether such a vote is an expression of support for the candidate or the candidate's party. Does this matter? The voter's dilemma The overall election result is taken as the sum of the results (expressed as constituencies or 'seats' won by each party) of all the individual constituency contests. This way of counting the result does not necessarily reflect the actual balance of votes cast but nevertheless determines which party or parties will form the Government. This counting method, in effect, ignores all the votes cast for losing candidates. The system is often called the 'winner takes all'. Does this matter? FPTP in a multiparty democracy PR Systems In PR systems such as PR List , AMS / MMP, or DPR Voting, voters cast a vote directly for a party. The votes for each party can be added up to give a total across the country, or across regions. This determines by simple proportionality how many votes each parliamentary party has in the parliament. For the prospective voter, every vote counts. Each PR system then has different ways of determining who should be the representatives of the people in the parliament. ' Pure' PR (PR List) In Closed List PR, the party vote determines by simple proportionality how many votes each parliamentary party has in the parliament. There is no separate ballot for the individual cadidates. The Representatives, the members of the parliamentary party are 'elected' from a list of party candidates. The numbers elected are proportional to the party vote and in strict order according to the predetermined party list. The voter has no say in which individuals of each party are elected. Hybrid PR Systems (Systems that combine PR with FPTP) In Hybrid PR systems such as MMP (Mixed Member Proportional), AMS (Additional Member System), and DPR (Direct Party and Representative Voting), voters have two votes, one for the party and one to elect a constituency MP. The party vote largely decides the total number of votes each parliamentary party gets in Parliament. The second vote is to choose the MP the voter wants to represent the electorate they live in. The members of the parliamentary party are elected wholly or partly by the second vote. MMP and AMS combine PR, FPTP and Party List systems. Some members of the parliamentary party are elected as constituency MPs by FPTP in single member constituencies. The Party vote is used to elect additional MPs from a party list in order to improve the proportionality of the result. Using your party vote is not necessarily simple or intuitive - see here. With this system MPs can be elected by two different methods, some have constituencies and some do not. Compared with simple FPTP, AMS requires fewer constituencies, and thus a process of redrawing all the constituency boundaries. Mixed member systems differ slightly from country to country. In AMS the number of MPs in the parliament is fixed, and as a consequence the result may not be fully proportional. With MMP additional MPs may be required to achieve the required degree of proportionality. The degree of proportionality varies depending on the ratio of MPs elected by FPTP to the number of party list MPs, and the rules by which the party list MPs are appointed. DPR Voting is a simple system where voters have two separate votes. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table comparing voting systems which could be used for electing MPs to the House of Commons |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See DPR Voting on YouTube (video made in Canada) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See also a short description of DPR Voting (a 2 page pdf), and a full description (20 page pdf) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MMP and AMS are very similar to DPR Voting in many respects, and have the common goals of electing Single Member Constituency MPs as well as achieving a form of Proportional Representation. AMS/MMP (a mixed member Proportional system) is a voting system used in Scotland and backed by the Green Party. Compare AMS/MMP with DPR Voting here The Single Transferable Vote (STV) is promoted by the Electoral Reform Society and others as a PR system for the UK. Compare STV with DPR Voting here. DPR Voting addresses both the weaknesses of FPTP, and the disadvantages of the AMS / MMP and STV systems, and so neutralises most of the arguments for keeping FPTP. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First Past the Post (FPTP) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Single Transferable Vote (STV) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional Member System (Mixed Member Proportional) Additional Member System - AMS (see also Mixed Member Proportional - MMP) is a voting system designed to achieve a (close to) proportional result. To achieve proportionality there are two ways members can be elected – by election as a constituency MP and by election from a party list. In most models the voter casts two votes: one for a constituency representative and one for a party. The constituency MPs are elected by FPTP within their constituency. The party vote is used to elect Additional Members from the party list in order to achieve a proportional result. In AMS using the party vote is not necessarily simple or intuitive see here. In MMP, but not AMS, if a party wins more constituency seats than justified by its proportion of the total vote, the size of the Parliament is increased so that the overall outcome is proportional to the votes, with other parties receiving additional list seats (Overhang). For this reason AMS is not a fully proportional system. In MMP, but not AMS, to qualify for additional members from the party list, a party must exceed a predetermined threshold of votes - 5% in Germany. AMS /MMP is used in Germany (MMP), Scotland(AMS), Wales (AMS) and elsewhere See the main differences between MMP and DPR Voting Party List Proportional Representation Party-list proportional representation is a voting system designed to achieve proportional representation (PR) In a closed party list system, voters vote directly for the party. Parties make lists of candidates to be elected, and seats get allocated to each party in proportion to the number of votes the party receives. The larger the size of the constituency, the more proportional the result. There are variations based on this system. Party Lists are used in Israel, Italy and elsewhere. UK Members of the European Parliament are elected by a closed list system with regional constituencies. A criticism of Party list PR is that the MPs are not elected directly in a constituency contest. Rather they are appointed by virtue of being on the Party List of candidates. The Party draws up the Party list of candidates. The candidate at the top of the list is elected first. Therefore whereabouts on the list is critical to the candidates' chance of being elected. MPs owe their election to the Party rather than the voters, and this gives the Party considerable power over its MPs. Similarly there are no Constituency MPs, and therefore the system does not provide a close link between an MP and their constituents. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Alternative Vote (AV) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Supplementary Vote (SV) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alternative Vote Plus (AV+) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rural–urban proportional representation (RUP), also known as Flexible District PR, is a combination of voting systems designed by Fair Vote Canada. Rural–urban proportional uses the single transferable vote (STV) for urban constituencies and mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) for rural ridings. It recognises that STV works better in more densely populated urban areas, and but is much less suitable in sparsely populated rural constituencies. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Representation |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR Voting) Voters cast two votes - a 'Party' vote, and a 'Representative' vote. Each vote is a single choice - the voter marks their choice with a single X The 'Party' vote determines the success of the party. The 'Representative' vote determines which individual becomes the MP for the local constiituency. The candidate who gets the most 'Representative' votes is elected as the MP for the constituency (a simple plurality). The 'party' votes, aggregated nationwide, determine the number of votes each party has in the parliament and therefore which party, or parties, can form the Government. For votes in parliament, the Party's parliamentary votes are shared out equally amongst the parties MPs. As a result, each MP has a vote that has a value which may be more or less than one. On ‘non party political’ issues, each MP has an equal vote. see comparison between DPR Voting and STV as a direct replacement for FPTP. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DPR Voting is a way of introducing proportionality to our political system while retaining much of the existing familiar electoral system. It addresses the main criticisms of the FPTP and avoids the main criticisms of other proposed systems of electoral reform. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
STV |
DPR Voting |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PR |
STV – seats in Parliament are approx proportional to overall votes (but note that STV 'can produce unexpected and distorting outcomes' - Malta 1981, 1987, 1996, 2008 |
DPR Voting – Party voting strength in Parliament is proportional to votes cast in the election (but small parties may fail to achieve the threshold) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Constituencies |
STV is intended for Multimember constituencies |
DPR Voting is intended for single member constituencies and would not need constituency sizes to change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Constituency Boundaries. |
Boundaries and constituency size are potentially contentious, and are important to the way the system works |
Boundaries and constituency sizes are not important to the way the system works and do not affect the election result. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Party Neutrality |
STV favours, or works better with, a three party system (because, in order to achieve proportionality, MMCs need to be large when 4 or more parties with evenly distibuted support compete.) |
DPR Voting can accommodate any number of parties but small party representation depends on where the threshold is set. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Simplicity |
STV is a preferential voting system. Ease of voting depends on the size of the constituency and the number of candidates. Counting is a complex process. The electoral system is difficult to explain. |
Voting and counting are simple, quick and familiar. The basics of the system are easy to explain It would require some changes to the way MPs vote in parliament |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wasted Votes |
A few. Some voters will still find that their first preference candidate never gets elected. |
There are no wasted votes. Every 'Party' vote cast makes a (small) difference to the result of the election. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Safe Seats |
There are no safe seats in either system |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tactical Voting |
With STV, there is some scope for tactical voting. |
With DPR Voting, (party) tactical voting is redundant. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
‘Marginals' |
The significance of Marginal Constituencies is much reduced. |
There are no Marginal constituencies |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Voter Choice |
STV – the voter may have a choice of candidates from within one party from which to choose. |
DPR Voting – the voter has two votes, one for their choice of party, and one for their choice of MP. The voter can vote for the party of choice and the candidate of choice without the one compromising the other. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Party Lists |
Neither system uses a Party list. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In Parliament |
STV - Parliament would be populated with MPs from different parties in numbers broadly proportional to the votes cast for the parties. |
DPR Voting – Parliament would be populated with MPs elected as the local choice. It is not possible to say if this would reflect the present plurality system or whether the mix would in time reflect overall voting trends. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Small Party Representation. |
STV would increase small party representation. |
With DPR Voting there is an imperative for every party to win at least one constituency in order to exercise its full party vote value. If a party does not win a constituency but does exceed the voting threshold it is limited to one MP with a single vote (Automatic election). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Independent MPs |
It is hard for Independent MPs to be elected because many votes will still be cast for a party label. In addition the candidate has a much larger constituency to campaign over. |
DPR Voting – Party labels would be less of a handicap to the Independent Candidates and the smaller constituency would make campaigning easier and cheaper for independents. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Psephology |
STV - interpreting voting results is complex. |
DPR Voting – Results would be much simpler to interpret than STV or FPTP. |
Multimember constituencies (MMCs) have disadvantages compared to single member constituencies (SMCs) Single Member constituencies (SMCs)
Multi Member constituencies (MMCs)
|
||
|
Direct Party and Representative Voting is a form of Proportional representation (PR) which has the simplicity of the existing 'First past the post' system, maintains the single member constituency, and requires little change to the existing voting system |
DPR Voting - simple, practical electoral reform
|