Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
10 characteristics of democracy
First past the post versus proportional representation
Merits and demerits of democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: 10 characteristics of democracy
The Electoral Systems of Britain and Sweden
The quality of a democracy is regulated by the electoral system that awards seats in democratic assemblies to those seeking office. This paper will compare the electoral systems of the parliaments of the United Kingdom (herein called Britain) and Sweden in order to determine which country has the preferred electoral system. The quality to be measured is the fairness of democratic representation, which is to say, how properly the various public interests are represented and how much control voters have over their government. The first part of the paper will study each electoral system separately, looking at the mechanics of how the members of parliament are elected, what kind of political party system can participate in the parliament, and how the parties go about setting up the executive branch of government. The second part will compare and contrast the two parliaments, and afterwards it will be shown how one of the parliaments represents its electorate more fairly and democratically. These two countries have been chosen because Britain?s electoral system is characterized as a system of single-member districts, and Sweden?s system is considered to provide proportional representation, which strives to elect members of political parties in the proportions in which votes were cast.
The Electoral System in Britain
Voters in Britain elect members of the House of Commons, the more powerful lower house of the Westminster Parliament, for maximum terms of five years. Each one of the 659 electoral districts sends one member to the House of Commons after being chosen on the basis of plurality. Candidates obtain their places on the ballot by being nominated by their party. Frequently the w...
... middle of paper ...
...). "The Election of the Swedish Riksdag, September 2002," Representation. 39(2): 146-156.
Kavanagh, Dennis (2000). British Politics: Continuity and Change. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mattila, Mikko and Tapio Raunio (2002). "Government Formation in the Nordic Countries: The Electoral Connection," Scandinavian Political Studies. 25(3): 259-280.
Metcalf, Michael F (1987). The Riksdag: A History of the Swedish Parliament. New York: St. Martin?s Press.
Nation Master (2003). "British House of Commons." St. Petersburg, Florida: WikiMedia. .
Nation Master (2003). "Elections in Sweden." St. Petersburg, Florida: WikiMedia. .
Petersson, Olof et al. (1997). Report from the Democratic Audit of Sweden 1996. Stockholm: SNS F�rlag.
This paper discusses about the recent case, Rowe v Electoral Commissioner [2010] 273 ALR 1 (hereafter Rowe), related with the notions of representative government and representative democracy. Through the discussion of the case, this paper also analyses its significance in Australia.
In the diet, there are 512 members of the House of Representatives, chosen from 130 election districts, with one exception elects from 3 to 5 representatives. Each voter has one vote, but 3 to 5 candidates who receive the largest amount of votes are elected, and serve for 4 years unless the parliament is dissolved before the term expires. The house of Counselors consists of 252 members who are chosen for 6-year terms, where they most likely will serve their full term.
In this essay I will argue that British General Elections should be conducted using a system of Proportional Representation. First, I will argue that the system would be more democratic as every vote that is cast would be represented and this ...
For a democratic country to thrive, they must have a proper electoral system in producing the party to oversee our government. Since its inception in 1867, Canada has been using the first past the post system during elections to decide their leading party. Although we have been using this system for an extended duration of time, the FPTP system is flawed and should be changed. The goal of this paper is to prove the effectiveness of shifting to more of a proportional system, while also exposing the ineptness of Canada’s current system. With other methods advancing and little change of the first past the post system, this system is becoming predated. A variation of the proportional electoral system is key because it empowers voters, increases voter turnout, and creates a more diverse environment. Canada should adopt a more proportionate electoral system at the federal level if we wish to expand democracy.
The authors describe some of the advantages of a MMP system: “Mixed electoral systems provide fairly proportional outcomes, maintain the geographic link between constituents and members, provide for greater choice, and allow the opportunity for smaller parties to represented in Parliament” (p. 11). This system works better than the current FPTP or plurality system, because it allows citizen’s a second opportunity to have a voice. This is important because it would allow our minority groups to have a greater political influence. As mentioned earlier, in the current system all votes for candidates who lost, were insignificant to the election outcome. The authors explain: “Only those votes that go to the eventual winner count towards electing a representative, which may discourage people from voting or promote disaffection with the system” (p. 3). Alternatively, the MMP system allows citizen’s a second opportunity to elect party members in order to proportionally represent the popular
on what the electorate in each country votes for. In the US the have a
The SMP method of voting is what is now used in all Canadian Legislative Assemblies and the House of Commons. During a provincial election, each province is separated into electoral districts. The area allocated to each district is determined, largely, by population densi...
It has become widely accepted that Canada uses a first past the post electoral system. However, this system may not be in the best interest of Canada any more. There are many reasons why Canada should change its electoral system to a mixed member proportional one, a variant of proportional representation. With a first past the post system, the elected officials will always be of the majority and this excludes minorities from fair representation. Adopting MMP can create stronger voter turnouts, more personal campaigning, better individual representation, and better party selection. John Hiemstra and Harold Janson, are both in favour of a MMP electoral system. They understand that with the switch, the citizens will get more representation in parliament, their preferred choice will have some say in the House of Commons, and finally someone can be held accountable which creates a closer knit between citizens and Members of Parliament. Nelson Wiseman argues against the MMP system because he feels that there is nothing to be fixed in Canada. If the current system has been working well thus far, there is no need to change it. MMP would allow smaller parties to have their voices heard. Unfortunately first past the post tends to have an over representation of regional parties; contrary to first past the post system, MMP lets Canadians have advocates and legislators who the majority of citizens agree with. Another advantage of MMP is the elimination of strategic voting. With MMP people can finally vote for who they want to rather than choose who the majority may prefer. A change in the electoral system of Canada will create a more fair and just Parliament governing the citizens.
Karp, J. A. (2006). Political knowledge about electoral rules: Comparing mixed member proportional systems in Germany and New Zealand. Electoral Studies, 25(4), 714-730.
Dinkin, M., and White, I.2008. Voting system in UK. Library of House of Commons: Parliament and Constitution Centre. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/files/108_icpr_final.pdf (accessed November 20, 2010)
First off is Great Britain, an isolated nation known for developing a distinct system of government separate from that of the rest of continental Europe. The humble beginnings of Parliament blossomed into an important part of the British political process. Politically active and well-educated members of the common class formed the House of Commons
There are three types of electoral systems that are generally used around the world. Majority electoral systems, plurality electoral systems, and proportional representation. The party list system, a sub category of proportional representation has long been assessed and analyzed by a number of groups to identify whether it has the potential to be successful. In particular, since its introduction in the 1850’s the single non-transferable vote or SNTV is one particular electoral system that has been evaluated. SNTV is a system that is utilized for use in multi-member elections and can be used for both provincial and legislative systems. Through a careful investigation it can be seen that SNTV is similar in many aspects to other electoral systems and in which ways politicians politick. Yet, SNTV also influences some different types of politicking by politicians as a result of the way in which votes are tallied.
The United Kingdom is formally called “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.” Government in the United Kingdom is considered to be Parliamentary. Although it is parliamentary, it is also described as being “majoritarian.” Parliament in the UK works a little different than the United States; the people of the U.S. are allowed to elect their president. In the parliamentary system the people elect who will be in the legislature, and the legislature then selects who the next prime minister will be. Then, once the prime minister is selected he choses members of the cabinet. This system creates a quick and easy political decision-making by popular majority. In this essay we will discuss the strengths and limitations the majoritarian government of the UK. One of the strengths of majoritarian government is perhaps that it is the fastest to pass or veto legislation, however there are limitations or weaknesses also like it lacks checks and balances from the House of Lords, and the disadvantage that the smaller parties have when it comes to elections, and not having a set calendar date for elections.
Garner, R., Ferdinand, P. and Lawson, S. (2009) Introduction to Politics. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
It is well known that the British political system is one of the oldest political systems in the world. Obviously, it was formed within the time. The United Kingdom of the Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the constitutional monarchy, providing stability, continuity and national focus. The monarch is the head of state, but only Parliament has the right to create and undertake the legislation. The basis of the United Kingdom’s political system is a parliamentary democracy. Therefore, people think the role of the Queen as worthless and mainly unnecessarily demanding for funding, but is it like that?