First-Past-The-Post Voting

You are at a horse race, the two fastest horses in the lead are mere centimetres from each other. It's extremely difficult to predict who is going to win. Charlie overtakes Bella as they enter the last lap, but, at the last minute, Bella goes for it and wins by a margin of milliseconds. This is the scenario the First-Past-the-Post Voting System get its name from. Let's find out why by looking at what it is, how it works, how it's used in the UK and its advantages and disadvantages.

First Past the Post voting meaning

First Past the Post (FPTP) is the electoral system used in about a third of the world's countries. This system can be used to elect a head of state or members of the government. Most of the countries using this system are English speaking and include the UK, the US, and India.

Fig. 1 Map of nations that use the FPTP system

Under this system, voters cast a single vote by putting a cross (X) next to their chosen candidate on the ballot paper. Ballot papers are counted and the candidate with the most votes wins, entering parliament to represent that constituency. Candidates only require a plurality of votes to win, meaning that there is no requirement to obtain the majority (more than 50%) of votes cast, the winning candidate needs just one more vote than the runner-up candidate.

First-Past-the-Post voting system

The first-past-the-post voting system tends to result in a two-party system in which two major parties compete for office. The system tends to favour the two biggest, most established parties, the Labour and Conservative Party in the UK, which already have the majority of the country’s support. This makes it quite difficult for new or smaller parties to gain seats in parliament.

First-Past-the-Post voting system UK

In the UK, the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system is used for general elections and most local government elections in England and Wales.

The UK is divided into geographical constituencies, which could cover anything from an entire county to a district of a large city. Each of these constituencies elects one representative, or Member of Parliament (MP), to the House of Commons. The boundaries of each constituency are determined by independent commissions, who recommend changes to boundaries every five years. Changes may be due to increases or decreases in population or changes in local government boundaries. Both Houses of Parliament need to agree to any changes being made.

Fig. 2 A FPTP ballot paper for UK local councillors elections

One of the Liberal Democrats' main policies is to change the electoral system, as they have long argued for the benefits of the proportional representation system. Proportional representation would also likely result in them receiving more seats in Parliament.

First Past the Post pros and cons

Now let's have a look at some pros and cons of this system.

First-Past-the-Post pros

The advantages of the first-past-the-post system include:

• Simplicity: It is simple to understand and operate this type of voting system. Voters only vote for one candidate, and counting the votes is simple. Additionally, voters are already familiar with the system, as it has been around since the 19th century.

• Price: It is a relatively low-cost system that is effective.

• Speedy: The process of counting the votes, so finding out which candidate is elected can be determined quickly after the polls close.

• Clear outcome: FPTP voting systems usually result in a clear winner. The party that gained the most votes often gets the majority of seats.

• Representation: FPTP allows voters to clearly express their views on which party they believe should form the next government. Single-member constituencies typically provide a straightforward relationship between voters and their representatives.

• Two-party system benefits: First-past-the-post is ideal for two-party systems, where it generally leads to a strong single-party government. Single-party governments with working majorities typically assert their control over the legislative and policymaking processes, meaning that they will most likely do what they have promised and act predictably during times of crisis.

• Single-party government: generally, single-party governments do not rely on the support of other parties to pass legislation, meaning they can fulfil their mandates.

• Keeps out extremist points of view: the FPTP system makes it harder for far-right or far-left parties to win seats in parliament, and to therefore gain an access to greater publicity.

First-Past-the-Post cons

The disadvantages of the first-past-the-post system include:

• Disproportionate outcomes: The number of seats won by parties does not reflect the number of votes received. Representatives can get elected with relatively low levels of public support, while parties who achieve almost the same result end up with far fewer seats in parliament.

• Votes are weighted unequally: constituency sizes vary, meaning that votes have different values attributed to them. For example, a vote cast in a small constituency is likely to have a larger impact on the outcome rather than a single vote in a larger constituency.

• Tactical voting: The FPTP system can encourage tactical voting. Voters, instead of voting for the candidate they like, vote for the candidate with the highest chance of preventing the candidate they dislike from winning the seat.

• Limited choice: FPTP can strictly limit voters’ choice of candidates, as only one candidate stands for each party, meaning voters cannot choose between different candidates within the same party.

• Creates electoral deserts: FPTP can lead to electoral deserts in certain parts of the country where a party has little to no representation at all. This area is then effectively ignored by the party, for instance, the party ignores campaigning in the area, which also leads to new politicians moving away from that area if they wish to become influential within that party.

• Excludes smaller parties: the FPTP system can greatly exclude smaller parties from winning seats, especially if their voters are thinly spread over several different constituencies. It's possible for a party to have significant public support on a national level, but to never win any seats, as their votes are not concentrated in one geographically constituency.