James Forsyth James Forsyth

A voting system that’s past it

One part of the result is crystal clear even before polling day: our electoral system no longer functions

Thinkstock Photos 
issue 09 May 2015

The defence of the Westminster first-past-the-post voting system is that while it’s certainly unfair, it delivers decisive results. A relatively small swing in support from one party to another can deliver the kind of parliamentary majority that ensures fully functioning government. This worked well when British politics was a two-party business, and pretty well when it became a three-party affair. But in this new era of multi-party politics, the Westminster voting system is no longer fit for purpose — as the past few months have demonstrated.

When Britain was asked about changing electoral systems in the referendum for the alternative vote, we stuck with the devil we knew. Understandably: at the time there was reason to believe that coalition might prompt a return to two-party politics, in England at least. But then Ukip established itself as Britain’s third most popular political party, and even after coalition the Lib Dems still have considerably more MPs than they had in 1992 while the Greens are no longer simply a postscript in the election results.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in