Voting Systems and How Parliament Works

Two conversions

This part of the course looks like two topics bolted together, elections in one half and Parliament in the other. It is really one idea seen twice, because both halves are conversions. An election converts votes into seats. Parliament converts a proposal into a law. In each case there are rules for doing the converting, and every rule exists for a reason you can state, which is exactly what an exam question asks you to do. The two halves are also connected rather than merely next to each other. Because first past the post elects one member for each constituency, the House of Commons is a chamber of local representatives, so an MP has a constituency to answer to as well as a party. Change how votes convert into seats and you change what kind of chamber you get, which is why arguments about voting systems are never only about arithmetic.

Words for elections

Five terms for the first conversion. The exam expects the words themselves, used precisely.

Count the seats

An imaginary country has five constituencies. In every single one, Party A gets 40 votes, Party B gets 35 and Party C gets 25. Under first past the post, the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins that seat. How many of the five seats does Party A win?

What that result shows

Across all five constituencies Party A received 200 votes out of 500, which is 40 per cent, and won all five seats. Under a proportional system Party A would have held two of the five. Which statement describes this accurately?

• The two systems convert the same votes into very different numbers of seats
• First past the post produced the wrong answer, because 40 per cent should not give every seat
• Proportional systems always produce a fairer result
• Nothing, because the example is imaginary

What each system converts votes into

The useful question is not which is fairer but what each system is trying to produce. They are answering different questions, and each case is given here as its own supporters would state it.

Cause and consequence

Which two follow from first past the post

Select the TWO statements that follow directly from how first past the post works.

• A candidate can win a seat without receiving half the votes cast in that constituency
• Every constituency returns exactly one member to the Commons
• The party with the most votes nationally always forms the government
• Voters must rank the candidates in order of preference

Writing about a live argument

Whether the voting system should change is a real argument that people disagree about, and questions on it are marked on how well you handle the disagreement rather than on which side you take. Three habits earn the marks. First, attribute: write that supporters of proportional systems argue something, not that it is simply true. Second, give both cases properly. An answer that spends six lines on one view and one line on the other has not shown you understand the second one, whatever it says at the end. Third, if the question asks you to reach a judgement, reach one, and base it on the arguments you have just set out rather than on what you happened to think before you started. It is also worth remembering that nobody marking your paper knows or cares what you personally believe. What they can see is whether you can state a case you disagree with accurately, which is a skill worth having well beyond this exam.

The stages a bill goes through

Put the stages of making a law into order. Each stage exists so that a proposal is examined by different people in a different way.

• A bill is introduced and its title is read to the Commons
• Members debate the general principle of the bill and vote on it
• A smaller committee examines the bill line by line and suggests changes
• The bill goes to the House of Lords, which examines it and may propose amendments
• Once both Houses agree, the bill receives Royal Assent and becomes an Act

Who does what in Parliament

A balanced paragraph, worked

A question asks whether the United Kingdom should change the system used to elect the House of Commons. Here is a paragraph that would score well, with no party named anywhere. Those who defend first past the post argue that it produces a single member for each area who can be held responsible by the people living there, and that it usually delivers one party with a majority, so voters know who to blame if things go badly. Those who want a proportional system argue that a party can currently govern with well under half the votes cast, and that a system converting votes into seats more closely would mean fewer people casting votes that elect nobody. It can be argued that the two sides are not really disagreeing about arithmetic at all, but about what an election is for: choosing a local representative, or measuring national support. On that reading, no system is fairer in the abstract, and the choice depends on which of those two jobs matters more. Notice three moves. Each case is attributed to the people who hold it. Both are given at similar length. And the judgement at the end follows from the argument rather than arriving from outside it.

The machinery in a sentence

A proposed law is called a _____ while it is going through Parliament, and an Act once it has passed. The _____ chairs debates in the Commons impartially, while the _____ work to keep their own party members voting together. The House of _____ examines bills and can ask the Commons to think again. Each of these exists as a _____ on what would otherwise happen unchecked.

The line that takes a side

Four sentences from student answers about voting systems. Select the ONE that states a contested opinion as though it were a fact.

• Supporters of the current system argue that it produces stable government.
• Under first past the post a candidate wins with the most votes in a constituency.
• The current system is unfair and should obviously be replaced.
• Those who want reform argue that too many votes elect nobody.

Write it without taking a side

Assemble a sentence in the register this subject rewards.

Judging a reform proposal

A question asks you to assess a proposal to change the voting system for the Commons. Take the decisions in order.

• How should the answer begin?
• You want to use the case that a party can govern on under half the votes. How do you phrase it?
• How much space should the case you disagree with get?
• The question asks you to reach a judgement. What do you do?

Explain both halves

Explain how the United Kingdom turns votes into seats and proposals into laws, and assess the argument about whether the voting system should change. Do not name any party or politician.

• Explain how first past the post works, and what it converts votes into
• Explain how a proportional system differs in what it converts votes into
• Explain one consequence of first past the post for how the Commons is made up
• Set out the case for keeping the current system, attributed to those who hold it
• Set out the case for changing it, at similar length and equally attributed
• Explain the stages a bill passes through, and say what one of those stages checks
• Explain what the Speaker does and why impartiality matters in that role
• Reach a judgement on the voting system, based on the arguments you have set out