Proportional Representation
Wednesday, 29, Jun 2005 09:15
What is proportional representation?
Proportional Representation (PR) is the principle behind a number of electoral systems, all of which attempt to ensure that the outcome of the election reflects the proportion of support gained by each competing group.
PR contrasts to the Majoritarian principle, where whichever party or candidate obtains a plurality of votes within any given constituency wins that contest outright. Majoritarianism is the principle that underpins the First-Past-The-Post system that is used for elections to the House of Commons, along with other systems including alternative vote, bloc vote and various single member constituency systems.
Similarly, there are a number of different systems based on PR. A simple party-list PR system is used in the UK for the European Parliament. A different Additional Member System (AMS) is used to elect the Scottish parliament and the Welsh Assembly. There are several important differences and the principle of proportionality is applied quite differently between the two.
The single transferable vote system is used to elect the district councils (since 1973) and the MEPs in Northern Ireland, and the local government councils in Scotland (since 2007).
The extent to which an electoral system is PR-based depends on the number of candidates elected per constituency and the existence of any thresholds for successful election. A number of electoral systems combine elements of both, such as the single non-transferable vote and cumulative voting systems.
Background
PR is a relative novelty in British politics, although it has long been used in Europe and went through a spell of popularity in some circles in the late 19th century. There were several attempts to introduce PR voting for the UK parliament during the early 1900s and there were several more reviews of the topic. The University members of the UK parliament were elected by STV-PR until this special category of MP was abolished. More recently, support for PR has been growing since the 1970s, and its leading champions in the UK are the Liberal Democrats.
The growth in support for PR has stemmed largely from recent concerns about the First Past the Post system. In the 1970s, First Past the Post failed to produce the strong majority accountable governments that was said to be one of the key points in favour of the system. And throughout the 1980s, the growth of the third party share of the vote increasingly showed the handicaps of the First Past the Post system on parties other than the Conservatives and Labour.
For example, in Labour's 1997 election landslide, the Liberal Democrats secured 16.8 per cent of the total national vote, but won fewer than 10 per cent of the seats.
Labour promised a referendum on PR on coming to power in 1997, ostensibly as a result of an agreement with the Liberal Democrats, but nothing has since come about. However, a combination of PR and First Past The Post (the Additional Member System) was used for the elections to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh National Assembly, and the electoral system for the European Parliament was changed to a closed party list PR system.
In the Scottish elections of 1999 and 2003, and the Welsh elections of 1999, the electoral system failed to return an absolute majority for any one party, requiring coalition administrations to be formed.
Controversies
Arguments cited in favour of a change from First Past the Post to PR include:
The fairer treatment of minority parties and independent candidates
Fewer votes are 'wasted', as more people's preferences are taken into account
Greater effective choice for voters. By reducing the dominance of the large parties, PR may encourage turn-out and reduce apathy
By rarely producing an absolute majority for one party, PR ensures greater continuity of government and requires greater consensus in policy-making.
Arguments cited against PR include:
PR provides a route for extremists into the political mainstream, who would otherwise be excluded by the structure of FPTP
PR produces 'weak' coalition governments rather than 'strong' majority governments, which can lead to indecision, compromise and even legislative paralysis. It can also reduce accountability to voters, as an ousted party of government can reinstall itself by finding new coalition partners after an election
The adoption of list systems breaks the link between the elected representative and his or her constituency
The greater complexity and choice that PR allows can put voters off voting, by requiring them to have a greater knowledge of individual and party positions.
There is also an institutional paradox built into the British political system, working against the adoption of Proportional Representation. Any party that comes to power under First Past The Post is likely to appreciate the advantages that it gives to the government: a strong mandate, (usually) a lack of coalition partners, and considerable freedom of action. Therefore, arrival in government under First Past The Post is likely to dampen any party's enthusiasm for PR - as some suggested was the case with Labour in 1997.
Voting systems
Party Lists: (proportional)
Party list systems have two main forms - open and closed. Each party provides a list of candidates. With the open system, voters put a cross by the name of a candidate; with the closed system they put a cross by the name of a party. Voters have only one vote and seats are allocated in proportion to the number of votes received.
List PR is used to elect candidates in multi-member districts, or sometimes in an entire country. Party list systems vary considerably across the globe, determined chiefly by the size of districts, thresholds for securing seats and the manner in which the seats are allocated.
There are a number of methods used to translate votes into seat allocation. The most common are the d'Hondt method, the Sainte-Lague method, the Huntington-Hill method and the largest remainder (LR) method.
Where used: Party lists are the most common method of election in the world. Places where they are used include British elections to the European Parliament (excluding Northern Ireland, which uses STV); Israel's Parliament, the Knesset; and The Netherlands' Second Chamber.
Single Transferable Vote (STV): (semi-proportional)
STV uses preferential voting in multi-member constituencies. Each voter has one vote. This vote can transfer from the voter's first preference, to second preference and so on if the voter's preferred candidate has no chance of being elected or has enough votes already. Candidates do not need a majority of votes to be elected, just a known 'quota' or share of the votes determined by the size of the electorate and the number of positions to be filled.
Where used: Republic of Ireland - all elections except for the presidency and by-elections when Alternative Vote is used; Northern Ireland - Assembly, European and local government elections; Scotland - local elections from 2007; Malta - all elections; Australian Senate; Tasmanian House of Assembly; New Zealand - various local authorities; India - the indirect elections to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of India's federal Parliament.
Additional Member System: (hybrid)
AMS is a hybrid voting system, part First Past The Post and part closed party list, the party list element added on to make the result more proportional. Outside the UK it is more commonly referred to as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP).The exact proportion of constituency representatives and list representatives varies from country to country; the constituency element usually makes up between 50 and 80 per cent. Voters typically have two votes - one for a candidate and one for a party.
When all the votes are in, each constituency returns a winner, in the traditional FPTP style. If a candidate was standing in a constituency as well as on a party list, their name is taken off the list, with everyone below them moving up a place. The additional members are then allocated with the aim of tallying the number of seats won by each party to their share of the vote. Some systems do this solely on the basis of the party vote, others include the constituency vote too.
Where used: Scottish Parliament; Welsh Assembly; Greater London Assembly; Italy - Senate and Chamber of Deputies; Germany - Bundestag; New Zealand - House of Representatives; Mexico - Camara de Diputados (lower house); Bolivia - Camara de Diputados (lower house); Lesotho - National Assembly (lower house).
First Past The Post: (majoritarian)
First Past The Post voting, currently used to elect members of the House of Commons, takes place in single-member constituencies. The voter simply puts a cross in a box next to one candidate. The candidate with the most votes in the constituency wins. All other votes count for nothing. In some places, such as a number of English and Welsh local elections, FPTP is used to elect several representatives at one time. This system is known as the Multiple Non-Transferable Vote (MNTV).
FPTP is also known as simple majority voting or plurality voting.
Where used: FPTP is the second most widely used voting system in the world, after party lists. Countries which use this system include the UK, the US, Canada and India.
The Limited Vote: (majoritarian)
The Limited Vote is used in multi-member constituencies. It allows each elector more than one vote, but fewer votes than there are candidates to choose from. The candidates with the most votes get elected.
Where used: The Spanish Senate; Gibraltar's House of Assembly, where electors have eight votes for the 15 seats; various local-level elections, such as those for municipal offices in some US States.
Alternative Vote: (majoritarian)
The Alternative Vote (AV) is very much like First Past The Post. It is used to elect representatives for single-member constituencies, but rather than simply marking a solitary 'X' on the ballot paper, the voter has the chance to rank the candidates on offer by putting a '1' by their first preference, a '2' by their second preference and so on.
If a candidate receives a majority of first-preference votes (more people put them as number one than all the rest combined), then they are elected. If no candidate gains a majority on first preferences, then the second-preference votes of the candidate who finished last on the first count are redistributed. This process is repeated until someone gets over 50 per cent.
AV is also known as Instant Run-off Voting (IRV), Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) and Preferential Voting.
Where used: Australian House of Representatives; Australian Legislative Assemblies ("lower houses") of all states and territories (bar Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory, which both use STV); Australian Legislative Council in Tasmania; Irish Presidential election; By-elections to the Dáil (the lower house of the Irish Parliament); By-elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly; Papua New Guinea National Parliament; Fijian House of Representatives; numerous American Mayoral and district elections; Student Union elections.
Alternative Vote Plus:
The Alternative Vote Plus (AV+) was invented by the 1998 Independent Commission on the Voting System, commonly known as the Jenkins Commission. The Commission described the system as a "limited" form of AMS aimed at achieving a balance between the requirements of "broad proportionality" and "stable government".
AV+ was created with the intention of being the alternative to First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) in Labour's promised referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. The referendum never came and AV+ has, for now, been confined to the parliamentary archives.
Supplementary Vote (SV):
The SV system is similar to the Alternative Vote system, but under SV voters are limited to a first and second preference only. All first choice votes are tallied and if the candidate has a majority they are elected. If no candidate receives a majority, the top two candidates are retained, and the rest eliminated. The second-preference votes of the eliminated candidates are then counted, and any for either of the top two candidates are added to their first-round totals. Whichever candidate has the most votes after these second-preferences have been allocated is declared the winner.
Where used: Directly elected English mayors, most notably the Mayor of London.
Source: Electoral Reform Society
Statistics
In 2005 Labour polled 35.2% of the vote and won 355 seats; the Conservatives polled 32.4% of the vote and won 198 seats; the Liberal Democrats polled 22.0% of the vote and won 62 seats.
Source: House of Commons research paper, March 2006.
Under the First Past The Post system in 2005 George Galloway polled the votes of only 18.4 per cent of his constituents, yet he ended up in the House of Commons.
Only three MPs elected in 2005 secured the votes of more than 40 per cent of their constituents.
Source: Electoral Reform Society 2009
Quotes
"We can't afford to wait for a cross-party consensus because the Conservatives will never want to change this cosy Westminster stitch-up. People should now be given a say. A choice between the bankrupt system we have now; the timid option of Alternative Vote, a baby step in the right direction; and serious proposals for reform like Roy Jenkins' AV+ or better still the Single Transferable Vote... This is no time for his trademark timidity - Just get on with it."
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg responding to Prime Minister Gordon Brown's proposed political reforms - June 2009
"If Brown made this move when he entered office it might have been viewed as welcome tinkering, but at a time when our democratic institutions are in crisis a move to AV would be nothing short of negligence..People are looking for choice and accountability at elections, with a vote that might actually count. That simply won't happen with AV."
Dr Ken Ritchie, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society , reacting to news that Gordon Brown is considering a shift to the Alternative Vote (AV) - June 2009