1. Section 7 - Electoral systems
What you will learn
-
What is an electoral system
The nature of the UK electoral system
The electoral systems used in Scottish elections
Advantages and disadvantages of electoral systems
What is an electoral system?
An electoral system is the method by which you count the votes and decide how many
representatives each party wins. Different electoral systems can result in very different
election outcomes. For example if you used a different system you may even end with a
completely different government. In order to understand the Scottish electoral systems, we
must first look at the UK electoral system used to elect MPs.
First Past The Post
The electoral system used in the UK to elect MPs is known as First Past The Post (FPTP)
How does FPTP work?
Under First Past The Post (FPTP) voting takes place in single-member constituencies of
which there are 650 in the UK. Although constituencies vary widely in area, the average
number of voters in each constituency is approximately 68,175. In each constituency, voters
put a cross in a box next to their favoured candidate and the candidate with the most votes
in the constituency wins a seat in the House of Commons. Only a simple majority is needed to
win the seat. The party that wins the most seats in the House of Commons forms a
government.
Elections to the UK Parliament
Paisley and Renfrewshire South
Vote for one candidate only (X)
Douglas Alexander (Labour Party)
Andy Doig (Scottish National Party)
Gordon McCaskill (Conservative Party)
Ashay Ghai (Liberal Democrat)
Paul Mack (Independent)
Example FPTP ballot paper for Paisley and Renfrewshire South
1

2. Usually the party who wins the most seats has more than half of the seats and can form a
strong government. This is because the party has more seats than all the other parties put
together. We call this an overall majority. Sometimes, however, the votes can be spread in
such a way that no one party has more than half of the seats. This is called a ‘hung
parliament’. In these circumstances either one party will form a ‘minority government’ or
two parties may join together to form a ‘coalition government’ as is the case with the
Conservatives and Liberal Democrats just now when the Conservative party failed to win
more half of the seats in the House of Commons to form a strong government.
Constituency A
Labour
21,200 votes
Conservative
21,199 votes
Liberal Democrat
8,656 votes
SNP
3,821 votes
2010 UK General election results
B
Constituency B
Labour
30,000 votes
Conservative
10,226 votes
Liberal Democrat
4,333 votes
SNP
3,266 votes
Full UK Scoreboard
Seats
Votes
%
Conservative
307
10,726,214
36.1
Labour
258
8,609,527
29
Liberal Democrat
57
6,836,824
23
Democratic Unionist
8
168,216
0.6
SNP
6
491,386
1.7
Sinn Fein
5
171,942
0.6
Plaid Cymru
3
165,394
0.6
Green
1
285,616
1
UK Independence
0
919,546
3.1
Party
Party
2

3. Arguments for and against FPTP
There are many arguments for and against FPTP.
Arguments for FPTP
Arguments against FPTP
It's simple to understand and thus doesn't
cost much to administer and doesn't
alienate people who can't count.
Representatives can get elected on tiny
amounts of public support as it does not
matter by how much they win, only that
they get more votes than other candidates.
It encourages tactical voting, as voters
vote not for the candidate they most
prefer, but against the candidate they most
dislike.
FPTP in effect wastes huge numbers of
votes, as votes cast in a constituency for
losing candidates, or for the winning
candidate above the level they need to win
that seat, count for nothing.
FPTP severely restricts voter choice.
Parties are coalitions of many different
viewpoints. If the preferred-party
candidate in your constituency has views
with which you don't agree, you don't have
a means of saying so at the ballot box.
It doesn't take very long to count all the
votes and work out who's won, meaning
results can be declared a handful of hours
after polls close.
It can discourage extremist parties as it is
very hard for them to be elected, even if
they do achieve a sizeable number of votes.
It tends to produce a two-party system
which in turn tends to produce single-party
governments, which don't have to rely on
support from other parties to pass
legislation.
Usually one party gains a clear majority
It is very unfair on smaller parties as the
therefore a strong government is formed
results do not always reflect closely the
that can get things done.
number of votes a party received.
Activities
1. Describe how the First Past the Post voting system operates.
2. Draw 2 spider diagrams showing the arguments for and against FPTP.
3. What parties do you think benefit most from FPTP?
4. Which parties do you think find FPTP very unfair?
Exam Style Question
Explain in detail, the arguments for and against FPTP.
(Nat.4 – 4 Marks)
(Nat.5 - 8Marks)
3

4. Scottish Electoral System
The voting systems used in Scotland to elect MSPs and local councillors are different from
that used to elect MPs. The voting system used for Scottish Parliament elections is called
the Additional Members System (AMS) and for local councils it is called the Single
Transferable Vote (STV). Both are forms of Proportional Representation (PR). In PR systems
there is a greater link between votes received and votes won.
Additional Member System (AMS)
AMS is a hybrid voting system used to elect the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly
since 1999, as well as the London Assembly.
How does AMS work?
AMS combines elements of First Past the Post where voters mark an X next to the
candidate they want to represent them in their constituency, and proportional
representation, where voters select from a list of candidates for each party who represent a
larger regional constituency. This helps to overcome the disproportionally often associated
with First Past The Post elections.
Under AMS, each voter typically gets two votes – one for a candidate and one for a party.
The first vote is to elect 73 constituency MSPs in the local constituency elections using
FPTP. The second vote is to elect the 56 regional MSPs, in a multi-member constituency,
choosing between parties.
Elections of the Scottish Parliament
You have two votes
Constituency members
Vote once only
Regional members
(X)
(X)
A candidate
A party
B party
B candidate
C party
C candidate
D party
D candidate
E party
E candidate
F party
4
Vote once only

5. Overall, the Additional Member System creates eight Members of the Scottish Parliament
(MSPs) to represent every person in Scotland: one constituency MSP and seven regional
MSPs.
The eight regions of Scotland MSPs.
Each region elects 7.
Fact file – Additional Member
System
Constituency
Regional
This vote is for a Constituency
This vote is for Regional representatives
representative.
Scotland is divided up into 73 electoral areas,
Scotland is divided into 8 electoral areas
known as constituencies.
known as regions.
The electorate is given the choice of
Each Party has a list of prospective
different people, most of whom belong to a
candidates.
political party, to vote for to be their
constituency representative.
The person with the most votes in each
A particular mathematical formula is used
constituency wins and becomes the MSP for
to allocate additional members from the
that constituency.
various parties, based on the number of
votes each party receives.
They are First Past the Post winners.
This system is used so that the
percentage of votes a party receives in
the Election is about the same as the
percentage of seats they win in the
Scottish Parliament.
5

6. Case Study: Glasgow Anniesland 2011 election
The constituency vote was to elect the person who would represent the constituency of
Glasgow Anniesland. The results in that election were as follows.
Candidate name
Party
Votes Cast
Bill Butler
Scottish Labour
10,322
Bill Kidd
Scottish National Party
10,329
Marc Livingston
Communist party of Britain
256
Paul McGarry
Scottish Liberal Democrats
1,000
Matthew Taylor Smith
Scottish Conservative
2,011
Bill Kidd (SNP) won more votes than any other candidate (FPTP) in the constituency and
therefore was elected as the constituency MSP for Glasgow Anniesland.
The regional vote was for a political party and was counted from all the votes in the region of
Glasgow using a mathematical formula that means the total number of seats a party receives
in the election more accurately reflects the percentage of votes the party has received.
Each party provides a list of individuals numbered 1-7 before the election and if a party
receives 3 MSPs through the regional vote then numbers 1-3 on the list will be elected as
MSPs.
Party
No. of seats won
Regional MSP’.s
Labour
3
Hanzala Malik
Drew Smith
Anne McTaggart
Green
1
Patrick Harvie
Conservative
1
Ruth Davidson
Scottish National Party
2
Humza Yousaf
Bob Doras
Region of Glasgow - Regional vote result
Following the 2011 election result, the constituents of Anniesland are represented by the Bill
Kidd (constituency MSP) and, Hanzala Malik; Drew Smith; Anne McTaggart; Patrick Harvie;
Ruth Davidson; Humza Yousaf and Bob Doras. (Regional MSPs)
6

7. The impact of AMS
A fairer result
There is no doubt that AMS increases proportionality by reducing the gaps between share of
votes and share of seats. In sharp contrast, in the 2010 general election, the First Past The
Post system awarded Labour almost 70% of Scottish seats in the House of Commons with
only 42% of the vote.
Coalition government or minority party government
In 1999 and 2003 Labour formed a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats.
In the 2007 election the SNP overtook Labour as the strongest party in the Scottish
Parliament, but only by a single seat. The SNP formed a minority government and had to
depend on other parties supporting their policies for the respective bills to be passed in
Parliament.
Small parties encouraged and sometimes rewarded
In 2003 the Greens and the Scottish Social Party (SSP) won 13 out of 56 seats in the second
ballot. The presence of Green and SSP MSPs in the Scottish Parliament would not have been
achieved under First Past The Post. However, in the 2007 and 2011 elections only the
Greens, with two MSPs, represented the small parties.
Greater voter choice
There has been a large increase in the number of parties and individual candidates competing
for seats in the second ballot. More than 20 parties participated in the 2011 elections.
The impact of AMS in the 2011 Scottish Parliament election
The 2011 election was a triumph for the SNP who achieved a landslide victory that gave
them an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament and an end to either coalition or minority
government. Labour, who had maintained their dominance in the 2010 General election,
suffered a collapse in their support and number of MSPs. Labour lost 9 seats while the SNP
gained 22.
Party
SNP
+/-
Lab
+/-
Cons
+/-
Lib
+/-
0ther
+/
-11
3
-
Dems
Total
69
+22
37
-9
15
-2
5
Scottish Parliament election results, May 2011
However, the biggest losers were the Liberal Democrats. Scottish voters were unhappy that
the Liberal Democrats had joined up with the Conservatives to form a coalition government
after the 2010 general election. The Liberal Democrats were punished and lost 11 of their 16
seats.
7

8. Party
Seats
+/-
Votes
%
+/-%
SNP
53
+32
902,915
45.4
+12.5
Labour
15
-20
630,461
31.7
-0.5
Conservative
3
-3
276,652
13.9
-2.7
Liberal
2
-9
157,714
7.9
-8.2
0
0
21,480
1.1
-1.1
Democrat
Other
Scottish Parliament election May 2011, constituency results
Party
Seats
+/-
Votes
%
+/-%
SNP
16
-9
876,421
44.0
+13
Labour
22
-13
523,559
26.3
-2.9
Conservative
12
-2
245,967
12.4
-1.6
Liberal
3
-3
103,472
5.2
-6.1
-1
241,632
12.1
-2.5
Democrat
Labour
Scottish Parliament election May 2011, regional list results
Political party
Constituency
Regional
Total MSPs % of
% of
MSPs
MSPs
votes
seats
Conservative
3
12
15
13.15
11.6
Green
0
2
2
2.2
1.6
Labour
15
22
37
29
28.7
Liberal Democrats
2
3
5
6.55
3.9
Scottish National
53
16
69
44.7
53.5
Party
Scottish Parliamentary Election results 2011
The last shows that the percentage of votes is closely related to the percentage of seats
each party received. This is because of the formula that is used to ensure that the number
of seats for parties in the Scottish Parliament is roughly proportional to the number of
votes they won. A party that has a clear lead in the constituency election will do less well in
the regional list election. For example, Table 7.15 shows that the SNP won 53 constituency
seats but only 16 regional seats. The table also shows that the SNP won a majority of seats
in the Parliament. This is the first time a single party has held a majority.
8

9. Arguments for and against AMS
There are many arguments for and against the Additional Member System.
Arguments for AMS
Arguments against AMS
It is fairer because it produces a close
correlation between shares of votes and
shares of seats. In the 2011 Scottish
Parliament election, the Conservatives won
about 13% of the votes and about 12% of
the seats.
It gives minor parties more parliamentary
representation. In the 2003 election, the
Scottish Socialist Party, the Green Party,
the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party
and the Independents were all represented.
It can create a government in which a
minority party can implement its policies.
The Liberal Democrats finished fourth in
the 2003 Scottish election, yet formed a
government with Labour.
It reduces the number of wasted votes and
so encourages greater turnout.
Each voter has a directly accountable single
constituency representative.
Every voter has at least one effective vote.
9
It can lead to an unstable and weak
government. The minority SNP weak
government of 2007-2007 found it difficult
to implement its policies. It failed for
example to implement its policy of minimum
pricing of alcohol in November 2010.
It creates conflict between the
constituency MSP and the seven list MSPs.
There is clear rivalry between the two
classes of MSPs. MSPs elected via the
regional lists have been seen as having 'got
in via the backdoor' or as 'assisted place'
or 'second class' members.
It can be complicated with people getting
confused over exactly what they are
supposed to do with their two votes.
Many representatives are accountable to
the party leadership rather than the
voters.

10. Activities
1. Describe the AMS electoral system.
2. Under AMS, each voter typically gets two votes. Describe the differences between these
votes.
3. How many MSPs is each constituent in Scotland represented by?
4. How is the regional vote calculated? How are regional MSPs chosen?
4. Describe the impact of AMS in Scotland?
5. Why was the 2011 election was a triumph for the SNP?
Exam Style Question
Explain in detail, the arguments for and against AMS.
(Nat.4 – 4 Marks)
(Nat.5 - 8Marks)
The Single Transferable Vote (STV)
This PR system was used in the Scottish local government elections for the first time in May
2007. It is also used in Northern Ireland for elections to both the Northern Ireland
Assembly and the European Parliament.
How does STV work?
The Single Transferable Vote (STV) is a form of proportional representation which uses
preferential voting in multi-member constituencies. Candidates don't 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.
Each voter gets one vote, which can transfer from their first-preference to their secondpreference, so if a voters preferred candidate has no chance of being elected or has enough
votes already, their vote is transferred to another candidate. STV thus ensures that very
few votes are wasted, unlike other systems, especially First Past the Post, where only a small
number of votes actually contribute to the result.
10

11. The main features of STV
Representatives are chosen from multi-member constituencies
In a five-member local government constituency (ward), voters rank their preferences among
the total number of candidates standing, using the numbers 1 to 5.
Often the number of candidates will be in double figures.
Electors can vote for as many or as few candidates as they like.
A complicated quote system is used to calculate the minimum number of votes required to
win one of the seats to be filled.
Local council elections
Rank candidates in order of preference ‘1’, ‘2’, ‘3’ etc
Candidate
Number
Candidate A
5
Candidate B
3
Candidate C
1
Candidate D
4
Candidate E
2
Example STV ballot paper
The impact of STV in Scotland
The Local Government Elections 2007 and 2012
The introduction of the STV system in 2007 to replace FPTP has led to a fairer distribution
of seats among the parties but it has also led to far fewer councils being controlled by one
party. This results in a significant number of councils having coalition administrations. Labour
dominance of local government has ended: in 2003, Labour had 509 councillors and overall
control of 13 councils; SNP had 181 councillors and overall control of one council. In contrast,
in the 2007 elections using STV, SNP gained the most councillors having 363 but control of
no council, and Labour dropped to 348 councillors and control of two councils.
It was decided that elections for the Scottish Parliament and local councils would not take
place at the same time. For this reason, council elections were delayed until 2012. Both the
SNP and Labour claimed they were the winners in the 2012 council elections. The SNP could
argue they had the most seats and the largest increase in councillors. Labour could argue
they controlled the most councils, including Glasgow, which the SNP had hoped to win. What
11

12. was clear was that the Liberal Democrats did badly – they lost 95 seats and suffered the
humiliation of an Independent candidate dressed as a penguin receiving more votes than the
Liberal Democrat candidate in Edinburgh’s Pentland Hills ward – they came fourth behind ‘the
penguin’ Professor Pongoo, a climate activist.
Party
Number of councillors
Net gain/loss compared
with 2003 elections
Scottish National Party
363
+182
Scottish Labour
348
-161
Scottish Liberal Democrats
166
-9
Scottish Conservative
143
+20
Scottish Green
8
+8
2007 local council election results
Party
Number of councillors
Net gain/loss compared
with 2007 elections
Scottish National Party
425
+62
Scottish Labour
394
+46
Scottish Liberal Democrats
71
-95
Scottish Conservative
115
-28
Scottish Green
14
+6
2012 local council election results
Party
2003 (FPTP)
2007 (STV)
2012 (STV)
Labour
13
2
4
SNP
1
0
2
Independents
6
3
4
Total councils
20
5
10
Councils controlled by Labour, SNP, Independents
12

13. Arguments for and against STV
There are many arguments for and against STV.
Arguments for STV
Arguments against STV
STV gives voters more choice than any
The process of counting the results takes
longer under STV, meaning that results
cannot usually be declared on the same
night as the vote took place.
other system. This in turn puts most power
in the hands of the voters, rather than the
party heads, who under other systems can
more easily determine who is elected.
Fewer votes are 'wasted' (i.e. cast for
losing candidates or unnecessarily cast for
the winner) under STV. This means that
In large multi-member constituencies,
ballot papers can get rather big and
confusing.
most voters can identity a representative
that they personally helped to elect. Such a
link in turn increases a representative's
accountability
Under STV, as opposed to hybrid systems
such as AMS, all MPs are elected on the
same basis, thus lessening the chances of
there being animosity between them.
A voting system that allows voters to rank
candidates is prone to so-called 'Donkey
voting', where voters vote for candidates in
the order they appear on the ballot.
Activities
1. Describe the main features of STV.
2. Outline the impact of the introduction of STV on the Scottish local council elections of
2007.
Exam Style Question
Explain in detail, the arguments for and against STV.
(Nat.4 – 4 Marks)
(Nat.5 - 8Marks)
13