by Alex Gibson
You may be surprised by this statement – it’s the 21st
century! Of course we are a democratic state; we are free to vote for who we
please. However, I would make the argument that this is not really the case.
As I have just mentioned, we have free and fair elections in
the UK – there are currently eight parties representing the British people in
Westminster. This means that a wide range of viewpoints and opinions of the
electorate are conveyed in parliament. However, I disagree with this.
Firstly, Britain adopts the First Past the Post system whereby all a candidate must do to win a
constituency in a general election is gain more votes than any of their
competitors – they do not need to win by a majority. Therefore, (and this was
the case in the Portsmouth South constituency in the election earlier this
year) a large percentage of the electorate did not want the candidate who
eventually won to do so (Stephen Morgan only had a percentage of 41%). The
effect of such a procedure means that the majority of certain constituencies in
Britain are inaccurately represented.
Moreover, as much as we have the illusion of voting for
whoever we please, the party we vote for may not necessarily have any real power
and thus, to ensure your vote is not considered ‘wasted’, you are better off
for voting for one of the major parties. Again, one may feel pressured into
voting for a party that only partially resembles their views instead of
choosing the candidates you would prefer but, because of their lack of
influence, wealth and chance of winning, you feel obliged not to vote for them.
This clearly is undemocratic as it deters the electorate for voting for who
they so wish.
Perhaps through no fault of our own, the low turnout in the
UK is a clear indicator of an ineffective democracy – how can our views be
represented if not all our views are expressed? The turnout has been steadily
increased since the disastrous 2001 election where only 59% of the electorate
voted. Significantly, the turnout has
been highest in recent years when it comes to both the Scottish and EU
referendums – 84.6% and 72.2% respectively. This is a clear message from the
eligible voters that they feel more engaged and interested in the world of
politics when they truly believe that their vote will count and the outcome is
not already foregone: during both of these referendum campaigns, the vote was
always going to be close, perhaps unlike in general elections where the electorate
choose not to vote due the concept of ‘safe seats’ as, if they vote for one
candidate, it is incredibly unlikely they will win due to the strong-rooted
backing of another party. During the 2015 general election, the BBC reported
that 225 constituencies had not changed party representation since before 1950,
also saying that over 25 million people lived in ‘safe seats.’ This once again
discourages the electorate from voting and shows an undemocratic system as
their views are not conveyed.
Overall, it is my submission that unless there is a
significant overhaul in the voting system in the UK, then our society will not
become any more democratic. This is because there would have to be changes to
the First Past the Post System, the
ideologies behind safe seats (which will be near-to impossible due to decades
of party loyalty) and how to dramatically increased turnout – all of which I do
not foresee in the coming years.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments with names are more likely to be published.