Why We Changed Our Voting System

It’s About Time We Changed Our Voting System
The voting system in the UK (First Past the Post) came into widespread use for Westminster elections more than 130 years ago and has barely changed since. Some might say the fact that the system has managed to last this long is a testament to how well it works. However, many people believe this just shows the unwillingness to change from both the British government and the British electorate. There are many alternatives available which represent the views of the population much better and there is a large amount of evidence to suggest that the current system is one of the main reasons for the low voter count at British elections. Many people believe their vote does not mean anything, which for many individuals is in fact the case.
There are many alternatives to our First Past the Post System which represent the opinions of the electorate proportionally. One such system is party list proportional representation. This type of PR is by far the
most common form of proportional representation as more than 80% of the PR systems used worldwide are some kind of party list voting. Party list voting systems can usually be categorised as either closed list or open list. Another PR system is mixed member proportional voting which, although it is one of the least used PR systems has gained a large amount of popularity in recent years as people realise the benefits of a system which combines the traditional plurality-majority voting system with party list PR. The last of the main voting systems is single-transferable voting or choice voting. This system is widely used today as it has a large number of benefits over plurality-majority voting, one of the main benefits being that it results in far fewer wasted votes. These systems all work in different ways but they are all trying to achieve the same thing, a government which fairly represents the people.
The reason all these alternatives to FPTP or majority rule voting were created was that people felt that the current system did not work for them. The advantages of these systems over majority rule are quite numerous. For a start all of the above systems encourage more people to vote to which is a core benefit of representative systems. Representative systems also lead to less tactical voting which is a common with majority rule voting systems. Another problem that people have is that Majority governments almost always win by a very small margin meaning a very large portion of the country feel misrepresented in government. However the main problem with FPTP is that it goes against small parties and minority opinions. FPTP can also lead to poor laws being passed because one political view has the majority in government. An example of this was the poll tax which later had to be repealed.
A system unique to the UK is an unelected upper chamber which is the House of Lords.
This house is largely made up of people promoted by the leader of the party in power. This means that the current prime minister can manipulate the political bias of the House of Lords. However because the House of lords is big at present any prime minister who tries to fill the house with his own political appointments faces a large amount of public criticism. Many people believe the House of Lords should be abolished because it is expensive and un-democratic. However, under our present First Past the Post System it can provide a useful check against bad legislation coming from a majority government in the Commons. For example David Cameron in October of 2015 threatened to suspend the House of Lords or flood it with Tory peers over tax credits. However, the House of Lords is not necessary under a representative system as legislation could only be passed if it has support across the political
spectrum.
The First Past the Post System is favoured by the two main parties in the UK. Many people say that this provides strong government so that decisions can be made relatively quickly. Most of the advantages of FPTP can be seen during elections. One of these advantages is the fact that votes are easy to count therefore the results of the election are known quickly. Many people like the fact that FPTP tends to produce a two party system however an equal number of people dislike this fact. Supporters of first past the post say that the various PR systems lead to coalition governments where too much time is spent arguing and not enough time spent on making firm decisions for the good of the country.
On the other hand a coalition government gives the opportunity for thorough debate before any final decisions are made which is democracy should work. Addressing the argument that under FPTP votes are counted quicker which is true, surely it is better to spend longer counting votes under a PR system if this results in more of the electorate feeling truly represented.
There is support gathering for PR in the UK as the smaller parties become more popular. There is a growing weariness about tactical voting and the idea of a wasted vote because would like to vote with their conscience and feel like their voice will be heard. Unfortunately it is unlikely that a form of PR will be implemented in this country for quite some time as the two main parties benefit from the current system so have no reason to introduce a form of proportional representation.