Jack Pirret

The Additional Members System (AMS) gives voters more choice and better
representation than does First Past the Post (FPTP).

Discuss.

In some respects, AMS gives voters more choice and better representation than does FPTP.
However, it must be said that it has some flaws.

The Additional Members System (AMS) is a voting system in which some representatives are
elected from geographical constituencies while others are elected under proportional
representation (PR) from a wider area, usually by party lists. Voters usually cast two votes,
the first for a candidate for his/her constituency, the second for a political party.

Voters can use their votes in different ways. For example, voters may wish to support a
specific party or candidate in one ballot but a different party in another ballot. Voters may
have a complex view of politics and not support one part in its entirety. For example, a voter
may cast a constituency vote for Scottish Labour and a regional vote for the Scottish Green
Party, reflecting the voter’s view of Scottish Labour as the best all-round package but also a
specific concern for environmental issues.

AMS, unlike other forms of PR, retains the direct link between constituency MSPs and their
constituencies. Over half of the MSPs – 73 out of 129 – are seen to be more accountable to
the voters as a result of this. There is a long tradition of MPs representing constituencies in
the UK, and AMS incorporates this popular aspect of FPTP.

Voters can also use one of their votes as a protest vote. In 2003, Margo Macdonald MSP, an
independent candidate, ran a campaign that criticised aspects of the Scottish government and
struck a chord among voters. She won over 27,000 votes in the Lothian regional ballot –
enough to have won 2 seats rather than 1 had this been allowed.

However, AMS lacks the simplicity offered by FPTP, and voters need to understand the
system properly to best use it to express their democratic will. The decision to hold the 2007
Holyrood elections using AMS, and the 2007 Scottish local elections using the Single
Transferrable Vote (STV) together may have added to voter confusion and contributed to
140,000 spoilt ballot papers.

AMS has brought greater diversity of political opinion to the Scottish Parliament, which may
have generated debate and not enough decisive action. While the coalition governments that
emerged out of the 1999 and 2003 elections have operated smoothly enough, there is no
guarantee that this will continue. It is also possible that minor parties could hold a
disproportional amount of power if they serve as partners in a coalition.

As a result of FPTP, all UK citizens have their own MPs, one for each constituency. Voters
can vote for an individual rather than the party that the candidate represents and can hold MPs
individually accountable at the next election. In the 2005 general election, for example, the
late Peter Law won Blaenau Gwent as an independent, having been rejected as the official
Labour candidate. He defended the official Labour candidate in what had been one of the
safest Labour seats in the UK. Peter Law’s victory may suggest that many voters regard the
individual over the party.

Also, FPTP generates outright winners in each constituency, and has public approval of doing
so. In the Winchester constituency in 1997, Liberal Democrat candidate Mark Oaten won by
only two votes. The second-placed candidate successfully demanded a re-run of the
Winchester election. In this re-run, Mark Oaten again won, this time by around 20,000 votes,
supporting the original outcome.

Under FPTP most of the votes cast do not directly affect which MPs are elected. Many voters,
especially in safe seats, have no effect on the end result and face the same situation in general
election after general election, possibly throughout their lifetimes.

For example, in the 2005 general elction, 35.4% of votes cast in Dumfries and Galloway,
30.4% of the votes cast in Perth and Perthshire North, and 25.1% of votes cast in Stirling
went to the Conservatives. These votes did not lead to a Conservative MP in any of these
constituencies, in fact, only one Conservative MP was elected in all of Scotland, despite the
Conservatives winning 15.8% of the Scottish votes cast overall.

In conclusion AMS is a good voting system in that it is more proportionally representative

than FPTP, however, it must be said that there are some flaws, which aren’t present under
FPTP, such as the lack of simplicity.