Question: Using the source, evaluate the view that the voters have little to choose from in most UK elections. (30)
Source itself is included in the document. It includes some comments from the teacher on how to further improve the essay. Done under test conditions.
Topic Test Please answer the test in the one note (typed), below.
Nov 22 I'm not at school today, unfortunately.
Work in silence, and don't use any other resources.
Many thanks
Chris
Topic Test
Nov 22.do...
To a certain extent, the source does argue that voters in the United Kingdom do have little to choose from in
most UK elections. They first give the fact that "since the Second World War, all the governments in the UK have
been formed by either the Labour Party or the Conservative Party". This shows that there has been 2 parties that
have been dominant for more than a century in UK politics and this limits the choice of who the voters want to "This is a valid view, because..."
form the government. Even if voters were to vote for smaller parties like the Liberal Democrats, there is a more
realistic chance that the government will be formed by either Labour or the Conservatives. It also mentions that
the "current electoral system favours few parties in the race to govern" which is a valid argument as the current
electoral system, First-past-the-post (FPTP) disadvantages smaller parties and helps amplify wins for the larger
parties due to the fact that smaller parties tend to have their voters more widespread throughout the country
whereas parties like Labour and the Conservatives tend to congregate in certain areas (like the 'red wall' seats like
Sedgefield for Labour and the South for the Conservatives). This further narrows the realistic choices for voters as
they know their vote will be wasted if they vote for a small party like the Greens in a general election.
The source also mentions that amongst those major parties, in terms of policy, "there is little that separates the
major parties and all policy they produce is similar". With the realistic view that the Conservatives and Labour are
the only parties capable of winning an election under a FPTP electoral system, this suggests that both major
parties are not that different and aim for similar achievements with deviations "over style as opposed to
substance" and therefore theoretically meaning that voters only have a choice between 2 parties who want the
Good - evaluative, analytical.
same thing but in a different way and that portrays a situation that voters don't even have much of a choice in
the first place as both parties want the same things and have similar policies. To rebut this argument, the source
has presented that in contrast, "many of the minority parties present a fresh approach to politics" which is also
true since parties like the Green party goes further away from the 'centre ground' that both main parties fight
over. What it essentially means is that smaller parties move away from a 'big tent' approach that Labour and the
Conservatives do to gain more votes and instead try to sway voters towards their ideology. This means that UK
voters now have more choices as smaller parties help to accommodate those who have views which are further
left/right or those who are passionate about a certain issues, an example would be that a person worried about
the climate would want to vote for the Green Party as they would be more representative of his/her views.
The source argues that there has been "a significant shift" that has taken place in UK politics as large chunks of
the population have begun to vote for smaller parties. This was seen in 2015 when UKIP and the Green Party had
a combine total of 5 million votes (but no seats for UKIP and only 1 seat for the Greens, an example of how the
FPTP system disadvantages smaller parties) as well as the SNP being able to win 56/59 seats in Scotland, making
them the 3rd largest party in the House of Commons. This big growth of smaller parties presented by the source But what happened in 2017 and 2019?
indicates that the British people do have choices when it comes to the ballot as they have attempted to vote for
other parties like UKIP, the Greens as well as the SNP. This shift in the landscape of politics in the UK has allowed
for reasonable belief that "a secure victory is now not the expected norm for either Labour or Conservative
Parties" and it shows that the UK people have begun to exercise and use their wide range of choices to vote for
other parties which are not part of the big 2 as now smaller parties are able to worry the 2 major parties and they
may be able to hold power as kingmakers if the 2 don't get a simple majority in the House of Commons.
Regionalist parties have also been seen to have an uptick in votes with parties like SNP and Plaid Cymru (Northern
Irish Parties are also a good demonstration of the availability of choice as Labour and the Conservatives MPs are
almost non-existent in Northern Irish constituencies) having seats in the House of Commons as people have
questioned the "Establishment of Westminster" and wants to see more variety within the House of Commons.
This further proves that there is choice for the people of Britain as parties like Plaid Cymru and the SNP help to Good. Firm position.
challenge the establishment of Westminster.
To conclude, the source gives a valid argument that with the current electoral system of FPTP, it is hard for other
parties to win enough seats in elections and this system is bound to be dominated by Labour and the Tories and
this narrows the choice for the people in terms of who they want to run the government. But with the existence
of parties like the SNP, the Greens and UKIP, many in recent times have flocked away from the 2 main parties as
seen in 2015 where 5 million British people decided to vote Green and UKIP as well as the SNP's success in Really clear, well done.
Scotland. This success shows the British people realising they have a wide choice of parties to choose from and
there is variety for them to pick from. Overall, the important argument taken from this source is that the
dominance of the 2 parties could soon be ending and the choices for the British people are expanding and the
British people do have more choice in most elections.
Clear, evaluative and well-argued. Well done.
25/30
Further discussion of recent electoral outcomes.
03. Electoral Systems Page 1
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller glennkho. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $14.12. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
