FPTP versus proportional representation
The writer is pursuing an MPhil in Political Science and is a member of the Institute of Policy and Research
Democracy is a system of government that is based on the rule of the majority. Democracy has gone through many changes and has developed as the most acceptable system of governance around the globe. Nevertheless, the most prevailing voting system, First Past The Post (FPTP), has failed to ensure the government of the majority. To have a valid majority government, the FPTP should be replaced by Proportional Representation.
In Azad Kashmir general elections, PTI got around 33% vote share, but it managed to bag more than 50% seats in the legislative assembly. Likewise, in the general elections of 2013 and 2018, PML-N and PTI got 33% and 32% votes respectively, but they managed to form governments with a clear parliamentary majority. It is an in-built fault in the FPTP that it fails to ensure the basic principle of majority rule. With Proportional Representation, any government must win a majority of votes, which means that to govern, a party must either collaborate with other parties or convince the majority to vote for it.
Another problem with the FPTP is that the voting intentions of the voters are not reflected in the results. To quote just one example, in the 2018 general elections, MQM got 733,245 votes with six general seats while ANP got 815,998 votes but only one general seat. Countless examples are demonstrating how the FPTP system suppresses diversity by denying representations to certain political parties. Contrarily, the system of Proportional Representation ensures diversity in the legislature. It allocates seats to the political parties according to their vote share. Therefore, the diverse viewpoints and opinions are appropriately represented in parliament.
In a democracy, every citizen’s vote is treated equally, but in reality, the FPTP negates this cardinal principle of democracy. Proportional Representation ensures that every vote has equal weight, regardless of where they reside or who they vote for. Therefore, each MNA would be elected with about the same number of votes, irrespective of their party.
Each voter has a single legislator to represent them in parliament under the FPTP system. But, under this system, millions of voters are misrepresented. For example, an MNA is elected by getting more than any other candidate, but most of the time, the number of votes cast against that MNA is more than the votes cast for him. In this way, the people are represented by the MNA they disagree with and vote against him. On the other hand, voters are represented, not misrepresented, under Proportional Representation. It means that virtually everyone may have at least one legislator who they voted for and who shares their views — someone to whom they can express their concerns.
Votes for losing candidates aren’t the only ones that go to waste because of the FPTP. Votes for winning candidates that go above and beyond what is required to win a specific constituency are likewise worthless. These ‘wasted votes’ which include both extra votes for winning candidates and votes for losing candidates are referred to together as ‘excess votes’. They have no bearing on the composition of parliament or the outcome of the election. Proportional Representation ensures that only a tiny percentage of votes are squandered. The overwhelming majority of voters would pick an MNA, and voters could be sure that their ballots would be counted, creating an incentive for everyone to vote in general elections.
Short-sighted, aggressive politics are encouraged by FPTP. Small shifts in a party’s popular vote can have significant repercussions. This encourages politicians to overstate their differences and focus on undermining other political parties rather than working together to find the appropriate solutions for the country’s best interests. Proportional Representation enables politicians to work together, collaborate, and reach an agreement in the country’s long-term interests. It enables policy-making by consensus.
In view of all these arguments, it can be concluded that FiPTP system should be replaced by Proportional Representation.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 1st, 2021.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.