Extended Response 2

Overall the Additional Member's System (A.M.S) is a much better system in relation to fair representation. One of the areas of representation where it trumps First Past The Post is in providing a proportional result. Percentage of votes often equals percentage of seats under AMS, in 2009 the SNP won 20.9% of the votes and 20.9% of the seats. With this more proportional result we can see that AMS is a much better reflection of voter opinion as parties often receive the exact number of seats they deserve. In comparison the voting system of FPTP is incredibly disproportional as it can cause both under and over representation. For example in 2010 Labour was over represented in Scotland with 42% of votes and gaining 69% of the seats, a significant and unfair increase as 58% of voters did not vote for Labour. In terms of under-representation the conservatives won 16% of votes in Scotland but only gained 2% of the seats. In these cases parties either acquired more or less seats than they deserved meaning FPTP is unfair in providing fair representation in terms of a proportional result. Clearly we can see that AMS is superior to FPTP in fair representation within the area of proportionality.

However First Past the Post does have some benefits in relation to fair representation in area of providing a strong government. FPTP is often more representative of the country as a whole and provides a strong government that will find it easy to pass Bills due to the majority vote. For example in the 1997 general election Labour won 419 seats with the other 240 going to the minority parties, this means Labour could make decisions with little opposition from the other parties so laws could be passed quickly and efficiently. AMS does not fair well in this instance however as it can cause a large displacement of power as representation is more widely spread among-st different parties who have dissimilar viewpoints from each other. This makes it difficult for parties to come to agreements on issues. In 2003 in Scotland the so-called “Rainbow Parliament” was made up of 7 different parties and two independent MSP’s in the parliament. Labour only had a minority government in this case which would have made passing legislation a lot more difficult in relation to their fundamental policies. Without a strong government the possibility of passing laws quickly and fairly representing constituents is significantly reduced when crucial decision cannot be made as easily. Overall in terms of achieving a strong majority government to pass legislation; FPTP is the more advantageous system than AMS with it providing mostly minority governments. A way in which FPTP provides fair representation.

Finally AMS is fairer in terms of fair representation in relation to Black Minority Ethnic (BME) and Female representation. FPTP can cause a lot of under representation in these areas as in 2010 the BME population of Britain was 13%, but as of that year only 4% of MP’s in Westminster were classed as BME. This also applies to women as they make up 51% of the UK population yet only 22% of the UK parliament. This means that FPTP does not provide fair representation for a large population demographic making it a parliament which is not fully in-touch with voters. AMS is much better at least in the case BME MSP’s as 4% of Scotland's population is BME and 2% of the parliament is classed as BME as of 2011. In the case of women 34.8% of MSP’s are women. In both these cases we see how AMS is much fairer in allowing Fair representation for voters. Here we can clearly see again how AMS is a much fairer system compared to FPTP in the area of BME and female MSP’s being elected, making it a better representation of the country as a whole.