“The Additional Member System
provides greater choice and is
more responsive to the will of the
electorate than First-Past-ThePost.” Discuss
15 marks
Warning!
The following slides do not display a whole essay. Rather they are
examples of paragraph structure that can be used
when writing your essays.
Important missing parts are the introduction and conclusion – your
essays would always have these!
Key:
Blue – introduce your point
Green – develop/explain your point
Pink – give examples to back up your point
However, whereas, on the other hand, in comparison to …flag up the
introduction of a balancing argument to the marker
Blue underlined – introduction of balancing point
Green underlined – explanation/development of balancing point
Pink underlined – examples to back up balancing points
Red – analysis: relate your points directly back to the wording of the
question. Draw mini conclusions in relation to the question.
AMS is more responsive to the will of the people because it is
roughly proportional. The list MSPs ‘top up’ the constituency
MSPs to make the overall result within a region approximately in
line with the wishes of the electorate. In the 2011 Scottish
Parliamentary elections Labour received 3 ‘top up’ MSPs to
reflect its level of support across the North East region as it
received 44,000 in the 2nd vote.
Whereas FPTP produces a disproportionate result. The two
main parties have concentrated support in certain areas so win
constituencies and seats. Smaller parties with less concentrated
support lose out under FPTP. For example, in 2005 Labour
received 36% of the vote but 55% of the seats. The Lib Dems
only received 10% of the seats with 22% of the vote.
This shows AMS is more responsive to the will of the people as
the composition of parliament will more closely represent the
wishes of the electorate as it has an element of proportionality
unlike FPTP.
AMS offers voters more choice. With AMS voters receive 2
votes – one for a candidate and one for a party. A voter
may choose to vote for the Liberal Democrat candidate in
the constituency vote but vote Green in the party vote.
However, with FPTP voter choice is limited. Using FPTP a
voter only has one vote for a candidate. For example,
in the 2010 UK General Election in the Banff and Buchan
constituency, voters could only choose one candidate from
a list of five which included one candidate from each of the
Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem and the BNP parties.
This shows AMS gives voters more choice as they have
two votes instead of one as is the case with FPTP.
It could be argued FPTP is more responsive to the will of the
people as it usually produces a majority government. This
means the government can usually get its bills voted through.
For example, in 1997 and 2001 the Labour party received a clear
mandate to govern with landslide majorities of 179 and 167
seats respectively. It was able to deliver on constitutional change
by setting up a Scottish Parliament – a key manifesto pledge.
Whereas, AMS usually results in coalition or minority
government. Coalitions tend to result in compromise policies that
no-one voted for. For example, the graduate endowment fund
set up by the Labour-Lib Dem coalition in Scotland. Being able to
deliver on the manifesto pledges the people voted for shows
FPTP is more responsive to the will of the people than coalition
comprises under an AMS election.
In the event of an MP dying or resigning, by-elections can be
held under FPTP offering more choice to the voter. As the
country is split up into constituencies under FPTP the public can
easily choose who they would like to replace an MP in their
constituency. For example, Iain McKenzie won the Inverclyde byelection to the UK Parliament following the death of Labour MP
David Cairns in May 2011.
Whereas there is no by-election facility for list MSPs under AMS.
The party leadership decides the placing of candidates on the
party list. If a list MSP dies or resigns it is the next person on the
list who takes up the seat. For example, when Conservative
MSP Mary Scanlon stood down as a list MSP for the Highlands
and Islands region in 2006, Dave Petrie took up the seat as he
followed Scanlon on the party list. This shows voters have much
more choice over who their representatives are under FPTP in
by-elections compared to AMS where the party leadership
decides.