People Empowering Politics

First Past the Post

First Past the Post (FPP) is a simple solid system. The electorate cross one candidate and the one with the most votes wins. Each elect also represents a much smaller constituency compared to PR. The weakness of this system is safe seats and gerrymandering.

A candidate can win with the largest minority of votes, which normally creates a two party system, one socialist and the other conservative. Which leads to lack of voter choice because you could either waste your vote on a smaller party or one of the main ones you don’t fully agree with. This all increases the chances of safe seats where one party can more easily win their constituency.

Gerrymandering is where the constituency is formed in such an unnatural way that it does not correspond to the local voters fixed community. This is done because the controlling party or directly elected leader, will change the boundaries so that the oppositions electorate are the minority in more constituencies.

This can be avoided with an independent boundary commission which will look at the voter populations and current boundaries. A percentage discrepancy can be introduced between the smallest and largest constituency.

Alterative Vote

The alternative Vote (AV) is where the electorate preference their candidate choices, with the least supported being eliminated. This gives voters more of a choice when selecting candidates and the winner must achieve an actual majority. Some people may feel its unfair for some votes to be counted more often than others, especially if you can max preference with a broad set of candidates, limited AV of three choices might be more acceptable?

Party List Proportional (Multiple Past the Post)

Party List Proportional uses a large constituency to contain multiple elects. Each Party would create and rank a list of candidates, normally decided by the party membership. If its an open list then the electorate can influence those rankings, otherwise a closed list denies this opportunity. This can be done by using FPP or AV within the list.

If you decide not to preference, then youre indirectly supporting the partys ranking. So in FPP the top candidate effectively receives your vote. While in AV the highest unmarked candidate will gain the earliest available number.

The Hare Quota will be used for winning elects, which is total votes divided by seats. Largest Remainder will be implemented in the second stage of voting, which is largest remaining votes to gain unclaimed seats.

D Hondt Method

The D Hondt Method (DHM) is a formula that divides the party vote share every time they win a candidate. The calculation is original party votes / (seats won +1 = ) = remaining votes.

When Party A wins their 2* seat in round four you calculate the remaining votes by their original vote. So 100,000 votes / (seats won 2 + 1 =3) = 33,333.

Sometimes smaller parties form coalitions to combine their votes and potentially win more seats. Their combined vote share is split by their partys vote shares to win seats. If they win four seats and each partys percentage share was A/50pc, B/30pc and C/20pc, then seat allocation would be A2, B1 and C1.

Sometimes a party needs to reach a percentage threshold like 5pc or enough to win a seat. Otherwise they are eliminated and this helps weed out smaller extreme parties.

A coalition may need to reach a higher threshold like 7pc or each additional party adds 5pc with a cap of 15pc, even if four or more parties are added.

Mixed Members Proportional

Mixed Members Proportional (MMP) is where the FPP/AV and DHM elects are equal in number. If DHM elects are less in number than FPP/AV its called Additional Members. If the first voting method doesnt affect the second, its called Parallel Voting. Voters have two ballot papers for each type, with party votes being separate from each election.

Before the first round of DHM elections, the FPP/AV seats already won divide the partys DHM votes first. If Party A won two FPP/AV seats and their DHM vote is 100,000. Then its 100,000 / (seats won 2 +1 =3) =33,333. So 33,333 is their new starting point in round one in DHM. The downside is FPP/AV elects will have to represent a constituency twice the size, or you double the amount of DHM elects.

Parties can do something sneaky and create decoy lists using satellite parties, which are working for the main party. Their voters will support their satellite party in the second round, meaning the main parties votes are not split in DHM elections from first round gains. To solve this voters only get one vote, meaning their single vote is used twice for local elections and for the larger constituency. Votes used to win seats locally are not counted unless they are surplus.

Single Transferable Vote

Single Transferable Vote (STV) is where the electorate can preference candidates across party lines. Your first preference might be candidate One of Party A, while your second preference is candidate Two of Party B. Additional votes above the winning threshold are passed on, to the voters next preference as a percentage. STV maximises voter contributions in winning candidates, by minimising wasted votes on losing choices.

In STV the now more commonly used system for winning seats is the Droop Quota, instead of the Hare. The Droop Quota threshold is total votes divided seats plus one, plus one vote. In a two seat constituency its 2 + 1 = 3 + 1 vote or 33pc + 1 vote. This is the lowest possible threshold to win a seat, as there will always be more candidates to seats available.

There is one major drawback. If a party fields too many candidates, they could lose more votes later. If the electorate spread their first preferences on multiple candidates within the same party, but their second preferences are for other parties and their candidates.

Now what if in the third round onwards those party A votes are transferred to the other two parties? As you can see Party A should have gained two seats by vote share, instead of the eventual one.

This is also why constituencies are normally ranged between 3-5 and the droop quota is used, as the lower threshold favours larger parties. This could be resolved if you first vote for the party and preference their candidate choices, with only surplus party votes going to another parties.

Party List Single Member Districts

Party List Single Member Districts (PLSMD) will rank party candidates based on how many votes they have won within their own district, but only one candidate can represent a district. The Hare Quota with Largest Remainder will be used. Parties can only compete in districts if they are still entitled to win a seat and have a candidate in place.

Once parties know how many seats they are entitled to, they will qualify their top candidates. These candidates will go onto a qualified list, with the highest voted candidate starting their constituency. If two or more qualified candidates are competing within the same district the one with the most votes wins, with the others being eliminated. The partys next highest ranked candidate will then be qualified.

You could call this Proportional Past the Post, but the problem I found is that people focus on the past the post element, thinking it’s the primary component. This can confuse some as they will not understand why someone who came 2nd, 3rd etc won that district. By calling this Party List Single Member Districts, we shift the focus on the proportional side of voting, which in turn makes not 1st place candidates winning more acceptable.

A four-party system is needed because core support for socialism and conservatism is divided between moderate and radical members. These two factions need their own parties, as having a civil war while in government or opposition costs the electorate.

To help solve this these two parties can form a coalition, meaning their votes are transferred if not winning in the first or second rounds. If a coalition government is formed the senior and junior partners are already established, which helps in creating joint policy.